ernment and local government young people, participation - murdoch university research ... · 2018....

��

��

Young people, participationand local government

Young people, participationand local governmentNational Youth Affairs Research Scheme

“ALIVE AND MOTIVATED”:

YOUNG PEOPLE, PARTICIPATION AND

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Sherry Saggers, David Palmer, Paul Royce, Lou Wilson and Alan Charlton

ii Alive and Motivated

Copyright © 2004, National Youth Affairs Research Scheme

ISBN 0 9752498 0 0

This paper was prepared by the National Youth Affairs Research Scheme (NYARS) and is intended to promote background research and other information as a basis for discussion. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the NYARS Steering Committee; the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA); or individual Australian Government, State or Territory Youth Ministers or Departments responsible for Youth Affairs.

Published by Australian Government Department of Family and Community Services on behalf of NYARS

Printed by National Capital Printing, Canberra

THE NATIONAL YOUTH AFFAIRS RESEARCH SCHEME (NYARS) was established in 1985 as a cooperative funding arrangement between the Australian, State and Territory Governments to facilitate nationally-based research into current social, political and economic factors affecting young people. The Scheme operates under the auspices of the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA).

Reports from NYARS studies released since the early 1990s are available free-of-charge on the web site of the Australian Government Department responsible for youth affairs. At the time this report was published, the web site address was: http://www.facs.gov.au/internet/facsinternet.nsf/aboutfacs/programs/youth-nyars.htm

iii

ContentsAcknowledgments vi

Executive summary 1

Chapter 1 Introduction 5 Purpose of the research 6 Objectives 6 The research team 7 Research methodology 7 Limitations 7

Chapter 2 Young people, participation and local government 9 Introduction 9 Changes in local government in Australia 9 What is “youth”? 11 Working with young people 12 Young people and participation 13 Community development and capacity building 15 Conclusion 15

Chapter 3 Youth services and other activities in local government in Australia 17 Introduction 17 Survey response 18 Range of services and other activities 19 Target groups 22 Funding 22 Governance 23 In kind support 24 Method of service provision 24 Youth service workers 25 Innovation 27 Profiles of local government youth services 28 Conclusion 30

Chapter 4 Reading and telling their own stories 31 Purpose of the case studies 31 Introduction 32 The GRIND newspaper 32 Short Fuse Youth Theatre Group 37 Palmerston Public Library Young Adults Program 40 Conclusion 45

Contents

iv Alive and Motivated

Chapter 5 Places and spaces for young people 47 Introduction 47 Public Spaces Protocol 47 The Longford Police Caution Project 53 Conclusion 57

Chapter 6 Flexible services through mobile outreach 59 Introduction 59 FEWCHA and the KAMELEON 59 Hornsby Shire Council Youth Services 63 Conclusion 68

Chapter 7 Engaging with Indigenous young people 69 Introduction 69 “About Jobs” 69 The Messenger/Dreaming Project 74 Moonah Community Group 79 Promoting Aboriginal Leadership in Schools 82 Conclusion 86

Chapter 8 Service delivery through the “one-stop-shop” 87 Introduction 87 Frontyard Youth Services 87 Onkaparinga Youth Development Model 92 Spinach web site 95 Conclusion 98

Chapter 9 Youth practice in local government 99 Towards a typology of local government practice 99 Youth participation and local government 101 What gets in the way of youth participation? 106 Conclusion 110

Chapter 10 Towards quality youth practice 111 What works? 111 Towards a framework for quality in local government practice 118 Conclusion 121

References 123

Appendices 129 1 Detailed methodology 129 2 Reference group 132 3 Online survey 133 4 Interview schedule 140 5 Case study sites 144

v

TablesTable 1: Survey response by state and territory 18

Table 2: Metropolitan and non-metropolitan survey responses 19

Table 3: Local government services provided for young people 19

Table 4: Recreational facilities provided by local government 21

Table 5: Target groups of local government youth services 22

Table 6: Main sources of funding for local government youth services 23

Table 7: Participation by young people in local government 23

Table 8: Groups in receipt of in-kind support from local government 24

Table 9: In-house provision of youth services 25

Table 10: Local government youth services by external contractor 26

Table 11: Youth services employees of local government 27

Table 12: Innovative programs for young people by local government 27

Table 13: A plan for improving youth practice in local government 119

Tables

vi Alive and Motivated

AcknowledgmentsPrincipal investigators for this project were

Sherry Saggers (Centre for Social Research, Edith Cowan University), David Palmer (Sociology and Community Development, Murdoch University), Paul Royce (Town of Kwinana) and Lou Wilson (consultant). Alan Charlton was employed as a research associate on the project. Reference Group members were: John Bailey, Darwin City Councillor; Judith Bessant, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne; Stuart Boyd and Mandy Smith, Adelaide City Council; Janie Dickenson, Launceston City Council;

David Khoury, member of 2002 Australian National Youth Roundtable; Ralph Lahey, ATSIC, Queensland; Paul Martin, Shire of Mundaring, Western Australia; Selena Uibo, 2002 National Youth Roundtable member. Administrative support was provided by the Institute for the Service Professions, Edith Cowan University.

We would like to acknowledge the young people, local government employees and other informants who enthusiastically contributed to this project, both during the field visits and subsequently.

Purpose of the researchThe purpose of this research was to develop

a deeper understanding of the role and impact of local government on young people, and how it may strengthen their inclusion in the communities in which they live. The research sought to provide a comprehensive review of the range and effectiveness of service delivery models designed for or accessed by young people in diverse parts of Australia.

Research methodsResearch methods included the collection

of qualitative and quantitative data and was guided by a Reference Group comprising young people, local government representatives, and a youth work academic. A literature review of local government engagement with young people reveals a shift in focus of local government from property services to human services, and structural and process “reforms” which have required more demanding forms of governance. Young people, too, represent a

dynamic category subject to changing policies and practices. The way in which young people have been conceptualised has influenced the development of youth work, as a discrete category of service. A contemporary focus on community development, participation and civic engagement frames at least the language and sometimes the content of much recent work with young people.

Online surveyAn online survey of youth services in all

local governments in Australia had a 35.7 per cent response rate. The purpose of the survey was to: ascertain the range of services and programs provided by local government; determine the target groups, funding, governance, and methods of service provision; outline youth services staff employed; and to invite local governments to nominate programs they considered innovative and which would form the basis for our case studies. The results reveal

Executive summary

2 Alive and Motivated

that youth services and activities are diverse, ranging from the most traditional, in the form of libraries and recreation, to the more recent attractions of information technology and electronic communication. A significant part of local government work with young people involves leadership and coordination, planning, policy development, advocacy and lobbying, and facilitation and support. Local governments are taking a more prominent role in the provision of education, employment and training for young people than in the past, and services are delivered by a diverse combination of in-house and external providers. A wide range of youth service staff are employed by local government.

Case studiesCase studies of innovative programs

nominated by local governments and selected by the Reference Group, were conducted in all states and territories except the Australian Capital Territory. These case studies provide a rich source of information about the history, achievements and challenges facing each project, providing sufficient detail for others to determine the applicability of the project to other areas. A review of the case studies reveals differences in the focus of projects, including those which: offer a service to young people; are concerned with representation and advocacy of and for young people; target particular “at risk” groups; or rely on local networks with an emphasis on family, community and leadership. Virtually all councils have some formal youth governance structures such as youth advisory groups or councils, while some included less formal means of mentoring, modelling and offering advice. A number of projects concentrated on training and educating young people for the labour market, while others offered organised activities and leisure options.

Community education and social action, using cultural development and the arts featured in some projects. Consultation and building agreements between young people and other community stakeholders were emphasised in some places, while the management and regulation of young people’s behaviour was typical of others.

Models of youth practice in local government

Using data from this research and the scholarly literature on young people and participation, models of youth practice are reviewed. This includes a typology of local government youth work practice which illustrates the importance of underlying philosophies, target groups, rationale and methods, collaboration and diversity, and the focus of activities. Local government youth practice is more than service work, involving the development of youth policy, coordinating activities of local groups, assisting groups to apply for funding and planning programs, and researching priorities of young people. Youth councils and other participatory mechanisms of local government are not new and in some cases may offer a flawed model for engaging with young people. Inhibitors to participation by young people identified by this research are discussed.

Towards quality youth practice in local government

Finally the ingredients for quality practice, built upon respectful collaboration with young people, are reviewed. These include: community resourcing; the importance of relationships; having fun; food; time; space; practical activity; flexibility and diversity of initiatives; simply talking; clarity of purpose and commitment; promoting success; resources; acting

3

strategically; the role of failure; respect, sensitivity and goodwill; the selection and education of staff; and most importantly valuing the contribution of young people. Principles for respectful initiatives with young people, and the means by which they might be implemented, are identified. Young people are “alive and motivated” when involved in programs and activities of their choosing. Their engagement goes

well beyond the skate parks and youth advisory councils of the past, involving everything from frontline service delivery to fringe arts and performance, newspaper production, and online participatory forums. Any local government seeking to engage young people has some inspiring models from which to start a conversation about participation and action.

Executive Summary

Many Australians will be aware of the increasing role of local government in their communities. The devolution of a wide range of community services to local government level has meant that Australians in all age and other social categories are likely to encounter local governments at some time in their lives. Local government, precisely because it is local, is also a first port of call for many residents concerned about health, safety or public order. The combination of this devolution of services and concerns about young people and public order has resulted in the development of a diverse range of direct and indirect services provided by local government to young people in Australia.

This is not the only way in which local government may influence the inclusion of young people within local communities, however. As this research and our own experiences confirm, council staff often commit considerable energy to activities that either complement youth service work

or pave the way for new programs and initiatives. This includes the development of formal youth policy statements or the articulation of youth strategies to be carried out over a number of years. Local councils also provide many facilities and activities which are theoretically accessible to all young people, including:

• public swimming pools, sporting facilities, and community venues;

• urban and social planning, and design activities (events permits, community development plans);

• community safety and crime prevention programs; and

• civic and participatory opportunities that promote the voice of young people.

Youth practice in local government is not restricted to service work. Many local government youth practitioners spend considerable time on the development of

1Introduction


youth policy, coordinating the activities of a broad range of local groups, assisting local groups to apply for additional funding and planning new programs, researching the lives and priorities of young people, and helping to manage local services.

Having responsibility for facilities, events and activities, and many community services within their local areas has raised broader issues about the way in which the social and cultural life of localities is enhanced. The language of community development, with its concerns for stronger, resilient communities exhibiting high social capital and associated signs of an active citizenry, has come to dominate strategies to achieve more vibrant, sustainable communities. These positive attributes of healthy communities are frequently illustrated with pictures of well-heeled young professionals or robust middle-aged couples enjoying their inner-city corner café or leafy suburbs, but young people – in all their manifestations – have rights as well to a place and spaces within these communities.

Purpose of the researchThe purpose of this research was to develop

a deeper understanding of the role and impact of local government on young people, and how it may strengthen their inclusion in the communities in which they live.

The research sought to provide a comprehensive review of the range and effectiveness of service delivery models and other local government activity designed for or accessed by young people in diverse parts of Australia. We wanted both an overview of what local government, in general, is providing for young people, and what specific local governments in metropolitan, regional, rural and remote communities are doing with and for young people.

The research was intended to assist in the capacity building of local governments, through

the identification of good and better practice models of delivery, so that they are more able to productively engage with young people (Mudaly 1999; Green & Haines 2002).

ObjectivesThe specific objectives of the research

were to:• provide an overview of the models of

local government activity relating to young people in different geographical contexts in Australia;

• identify the range of local government services and activities that impact on young people, both directly and indirectly;

• identify the characteristics of all local government activities that increase young people’s active involvement within their local community. This would include the ways that young people are involved and influential in the planning, design, implementation and evaluation of council activities that impact on young people;

• identify the barriers and thereby develop frameworks for the inclusion of young people in decision-making within local government structures;

• identify and analyse the implementation of good practice youth-impacting activities and initiatives in rural, regional, isolated and metropolitan to other local government areas;

• provide a draft framework that suggests methods for quality improvement in council activities that impact upon young people; and

• provide advice on the collaborative ways that other levels of government and the community may support local government in improving its own capacity to engage with young people.

7Chapter 1Introduction

Some of these objectives are more ambitious than others, and time and financial constraints have influenced the extent to which objectives have been met. All, however, are addressed in different sections of this report.

The research teamThe research team was a combination of

academics and youth work practitioners, all with some experience of local government in Australia. Our disciplinary backgrounds include anthropology (Saggers), sociology (Palmer, Saggers and Wilson), youth work (Royce, Palmer and Wilson) and history (Charlton). We have worked in urban, rural, regional and remote communities throughout Australia among diverse groups of Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. These experiences have influenced the research process and the way in which we have made sense of the data encountered. The theoretical orientations we brought to this work were diverse, and some of the struggles between structural and poststructural understandings of the social world we have had will be apparent to some readers.

Research methodologyThis research was designed to employ a

combination of quantitative and qualitative methodologies to explore local government engagement with young people. Three sets of contextual factors were deemed relevant: “practitioner discourse” or the language, ideas and concepts used by local government practitioners to talk about their work with young people; “organisational form”, which is influenced by organisational norms and values, structures and processes; and broader social and economic forces, such as the local and national economy, social policy context, and impact of local

agencies and organisations. Gaining access to these contextual factors was generally more successful through qualitative means.

After obtaining appropriate ethical clearance (which included the possibility of interviewing young people with and without parental consent, depending upon their circumstances) the research was conducted in seven stages:

• formation of a reference group;• literature review; • instrument development;• sample selection; • data collection;• data analysis; and• writing.

A more detailed methodology is provided in Appendix 1.

LimitationsThis research was to be a national study

of innovative practice by local government with and for young people, to be completed within one year, and within a modest budget. Obtaining valid research evidence of these practices required a significant qualitative component, which necessarily limits the generalisability of these findings. The results of the online survey of local government youth services, though valuable, demonstrate the limitations of such extensive data collection. They are not sufficiently comprehensive for others to use elsewhere. The methodology also disadvantages those councils not comfortable with this technology, and few hard copies of surveys were returned. First-hand observation and interviews provide a more rigorous evidence-base of innovative practices and programs but are expensive and time-consuming. This report thus represents a compromise between these competing limitations.

2Young people, participation and local government

IntroductionLocal government engagement with

young people has been influenced by many factors. First among these has been a shift in focus of local government from property services to human services, and structural and process “reforms” which have required more demanding forms of governance. Existing local governments are represented on a long continuum of “old” and “new” type councils which have been transformed by these changes to a greater or lesser extent. Young people, too, represent a dynamic, frequently troublesome category subject to changing policies and practices. The way in which young people have been conceptualised has influenced the development of youth work, as a discrete category of service. A contemporary focus on community development, participation and civic engagement frames at least the language and sometimes the content of much recent work with young people. This chapter

examines each of these factors in order to provide a framework for the description of youth services provided by local government which follows in this report.

Changes in local government in Australia

All local governments in Australia share some important features: they are democratically elected, are all sub-central governments and all have legal and political jurisdiction over clearly bounded and spatially limited areas. However, there is also considerable diversity amongst local governments. Situated in metropolitan capitals, or located in regional and isolated Australia; serving large constituencies with multi-million dollar budgets, or managing the affairs of small populations and low levels of funds; largely residential, substantially rural, industrial or commercial; LGAs across the nation come in all shapes and sizes. Until the early 1970s local authorities were


primarily concerned with that group of services dealing with what we might term the “three Rs” of local government: “roads, rates and rubbish” (Saggers, Carter, Boyd, Cooper & Sonn 2003, p. 23).

There have been a number of key trends in reform that have impacted upon all local authorities. Important among these shifts has been structural and process reforms that have seen the redrawing of boundaries, amalgamations between old councils, the reorganisation of functions, changes in management models and the introduction of more rigorous reporting and accountability systems (Caulfield 2003, p. 14). These changes in local authority governance can be characterised by the following:

• increases in management by visible managers;

• the shift towards measurable standards of performance;

• the controlling of activities by output measures;

• the disaggregation of council administra-tion into separate self-contained units;

• a move towards increased competi-tion between each other and private organisations;

• the taking up of private sector and corporate management practices and processes;

• a stress on discipline and parsimony in resource use; and

• the recasting of citizens as clients (Caulfield 2003; Hood 1996).

The emphasis on the efficient and streamlined delivery of services to consumers (Carson & Wadham 2001, p. 3; May 2003, p. 79) has often come at the cost of policy outcomes that are designed to benefit citizens rather than consumers (Aulich 1999, p. 19). There have been legislative changes

(pertaining to National Competition Policy, for example) that have imposed new standards and demands. At the same time, councils have experienced a reduction in their capacity to raise income. Consequently, there is a growing gap between the expectations of local government constituencies and the amount of resources available to meet them.

There has been a move away from property-based services to people-based or human services as local governments are increasingly called upon to take responsibility for services once delivered by other levels of government. More specifically, local governments have increased activity in relation to housing provision, recreation and culture, social and community services and community amenities (Johnson 2003). In the community development arena, local government functions “span a wide area, ranging from policy development, research and advocacy through to direct service provision”. This involves the support of outside services, coordination of local services, assistance with planning new initiatives, and acting as a catalyst for much local action (Hall 1993, p. 175; Muirhead 2002). Local government peak bodies in the states and territories have played an important role in promoting cultural change in councils and encouraging them to embrace new social policy areas.

Some have concluded that structural reforms of this nature have had a significant impact on how youth services have been delivered, at times to the detriment of improvements to service efficiency and effectiveness (Bessant & Emslie 1996, p. 43). Others argue that trends towards a new managerialism – the “quality movement”, competitive tendering and a shift towards outcomes-based and program measurement forms of governance – have

11Chapter 2Young people, participation and local government

failed to capture the complexity of youth service work in local government, resulted in a loss of autonomy to practitioners and provided barriers to innovation, and led to a reduction in the quality of service (Kerr & Savelsberg 2001, p. 22; Nabben 2001, pp. 44–5; Nevile 2000). Many local governments are struggling to find ways in which this type of work in community services and community development can be appropriately valued and measured (Saggers et al. 2003).

What is “youth”?For the purpose of this research, and

throughout much of the Australian youth services literature, young people are defined as those aged between 12–25 years. This age range presents challenges for local government youth service delivery, as leading researchers in the field have noted. Those engaged in the conceptualising of young people have mapped the range and diversity of ways of thinking about and treating this social category (Bessant, Sercombe, & Watts 1998; Tait 1993; Wyn & White 1997). Among the competing discussions, “ideas about ‘youth’ remain incomplete and experimental” (Bessant et al. 1998, p. 75). “Youth” may be intermediary, but the boundaries between children and youth and youth and adults are not clear. At different historical periods children and young people have been more and less economically and socially dependent, and their status has been correspondingly fluid. Bessant, reflecting recent emphases on the importance of citizenship and participation, describes “the ambiguous status of young people as citizens-in-pupae” (Bessant 2002, p. 34), although young people 18 years and older do have political and legal citizenship rights.

Beyond questions of age, we must negotiate the usefulness of the category. Stewart has noted that the “youth sector

appears to be organised around the social category of age despite the fact that this is not the most stratifying factor in most young people’s lives, leading to a minimisation of more important factors – specifically “gender, race, sexuality, class, ability [and] geography’ ” (Stewart 1998, p. 36). Bessant also argues that it is not enough to define young people “just by virtue of their age alone” (Bessant 1996, p. 33).

Other work has tracked well-established discourses that associate youth with crime, delinquency and anti-social behaviour. For some this stems from psycho-biological theories which posit adolescence as a period of psychological storm and stress, a time of volatility, instability and unpredictability (Bessant et al. 1998, p. 5). Arguably this paves the way for important dividing practices that are critical to the constitution of “youth” as a distinct and separate population (Bessant et al. 1998, p. 11).

Likewise, there are longstanding romantic traditions that see youth represented as the golden age, those who possess the potential to revive an “aged and sclerosed society” (Aries 1962, p. 30). Here young people are seen as the harbingers of hope and conceptualised as the guardians of the future.

Another conception of youth associates it with an extension of the innocence and vulnerability of childhood (Muncie 1983, p. 37). In this view, youth are virtuous until spoiled by the cruel distortions of adults. The obligation of those responsible for the care of children and young people is thus one of protection against the evil influences of adult life. The ideas of the 18th century French philosopher Rousseau support much of this thinking: childhood to him was a period of innocence to be “cocooned” from the “cruelties and distortions” of adult


society (Bessant et al. 1998, p. 9). Thus young people need to be restricted, not so much for the protection of adults but for their own good. One stream of this line of thinking imagines youth, particularly working class youth, as a group vulnerable to economic exploitation from capital (Gillis 1974, p. 61). This then necessitates special measures being taken to restrict and regulate young people’s involvement in the labour market.

The category of youth has emerged in a multitude of forms at different moments, and different views can overlap and be presented within one speech or declaration. At one moment youth are automatically associated with social problems; at another they are celebrated as great achievers and the key to the future. Youth have also featured as a national resource and, at different times since the 1960s, a potent political force (Bessant et al. 1998, p. 79). Youth has been, often at one and the same time, demonised, patronised and distanced while portrayed as vibrant, energetic and sexually attractive.

Particular groups, such as young Indigenous Australians, have long been subject to both fear, anger and loathing and desire, fascination and yearning of older Australians (Mickler 1998). Stacey et al. note that a “division is frequently established between young people as ‘achievers’, or potential achievers, using a hopeful, futuristic discourse, and young people who are ‘at risk’, troublesome and/or troubled” (Stacey et al. 2002, pp. 44–5).

Working with young peopleIf the category of “youth” is problematic,

the same can be said of “youth work”. Historical, structural, and societal processes all affect the nature of youth work in any one place. The nature of working with young people has changed dramatically over many

years. One continuing aspect might be that it has generally entailed “well-meaning adults deciding that some children and young people have problems, that they need help, and that some kind of organisation and service delivery will address that need” (Bessant et al. 1998, p. 270).

In Western societies youth work first appeared in the nineteenth century as “private, ‘philanthropic’ activity” (Bessant 1997, p. 34). The earliest examples of youth work in Australia targeted young people, especially working class men and boys, visible on city streets. Organisations like the Young Men’s and Women’s Christian Associations were specifically designed to target those who were seen to be vulnerable to the forces lurking around urban streets. “Try Societies” and the “Newsboys Clubs” that were set up on the east coast during the 1880s were explicit in their desire to keep young people off the street (Bessant et al. 1998, p. 302).

Recent work on the place of youth in public space reflects the persistence of such ideas (Crane & Dee 2001; Tait 1993; White 1990). White (1990) in fact locates the origins of organised youth work in Australia in attempts to restrict the access to public space of working class young men.

Rather than a single “occupation” with a controlling philosophy, youth work appears in many manifestations. A British collection on youth work outlines some of these approaches (Jeffs & Smith 1987). Youth workers explain their methods using terms such as social worker, community worker, educator, entrepreneur, caretaker, character-builder and “redcoat” or leisure worker. Each of these approaches implies a different view on the nature of “youth” or the factors (often “problems”) they face. Thus, leisure-based activities build character, improve young people’s standard of health, and relieve

13

boredom often associated with anti-social and criminal behaviour (Foreman 1987, p. 14). Another depiction of youth work exists in terms of traditional social work, focusing on the welfare needs of individuals with social problems (Britton 1987, p. 25). Another writer emphasises young people’s place in the community, and works with notions of community development (Lacey 1987).

Other youth workers see themselves as educationalists, providing young people with knowledge, skills and training so that they can themselves develop and improve their circumstances (Rosseter 1987). In another view, youth work is a type of caretaking of young people, guiding them through this important but risky stage of life (Stone 1987). In other settings youth workers are juvenile justice workers either advocating on behalf of young people experiencing problems with the law or participating in the process of punishment or community policing (Teasdale & Powell 1987).

Increasingly, youth work reflects a fascin-ation with the market, as neo-liberal understandings of the relationship between individuals and society dominate all domains of social life. Ingram, for example, describes youth work as entrepreneurial, assisting young people who are failing to compete well in market terms (Ingram 1987). From this perspective, young people live in a world where there is competition for each slice of the cake. Often youth workers accept only the crumbs of the cake and young people are not encouraged to compete for their own slice. Entrepreneurial youth work involves mentoring young people so that they can better operate in a market economy and establish an enterprising culture in themselves.

Youth work has also long involved leadership development and character building (Taylor 1987). From its earliest expressions in Australia and Britain youth work has involved adopting

the methods of those keen to see young people develop moral fibre, discipline and leadership potential (Maunders 1990, p. 43). This often involves youth workers running programs to develop self-esteem, improve self-worth, and inculcate self-determination in their charges. Alternatively it can involve building various youth participatory structures and offering “empowerment” opportunities for youth leaders.

Elsewhere, Jeffs and Smith (1990) imply that youth workers target young people according to issues related to inequality. They maintain that youth workers do not simply work with a general category called youth, nor do they concentrate their attention on all young people. Rather youth work involves targeting those groups of people who are victims of prejudice on the basis of age, gender, sexuality, race, disability, or class (Jeffs & Smith 1990). In support of this view, Bessant, Sercombe and Watts (1998) suggest that youth workers organise their work around key social issues facing young people. These issues include: family, health, sport and recreation, media, education, work and employment, poverty and inequality, social exclusion, and crime and violence. On an everyday basis this means that many youth workers spend considerable time on advocacy, policy development, planning, social action, rallying support, lobbying government, committee work, recruiting volunteers, and meeting with others to exchange information.

Young people and participationThe increasing market orientation in the

broader polity is reflected in much of the experiences of young people generally, and in their place as service recipients. Broad economic changes have made the place of young people less certain than in previous times: the difficulties of the “transition” from

Chapter 2Young people, participation and local government


childhood to adulthood is a burgeoning field for politicians, practitioners and academics alike. The move from secondary school to work or further education is increasingly complex, and governments of all stripes are battling to make the move easier and the policies more relevant (Angwin, Blackmore, Harrison & Shacklock 2001; Raffe 2003; Whiteley 2001; Wyn & White 1997). High unemployment dogs the youth sector. While State and Federal Governments deal with matters of education and training, local governments have moved towards dealing with personal health and wellbeing, crime prevention, and traditional recreational matters. This shift matches the rhetoric of responsiveness and user-ownership of both problems and solutions that is part of the market philosophy.

At a youth policy level, this is best repre-sented by the prominence of “participation” as a method to improve services and outcomes for young people. Although, as White and Wilson have noted, the nature of “youth policy” is “rather ambiguous” (1991, p. 2), one constant in recent times is the importance of active youth participation. This is illustrated clearly at state level, with most governments specifying the importance of participation by young people (Queensland Government 2002, p. 3; Tasmanian Office of Youth Affairs 1999, p. 7; Victorian Office for Youth 2002, pp. 7–10; Northern Territory 2003, pp. 22–23; South Australian Government 2003).

Whether couched in terms of leadership, democracy, or consultation, the concept is considered important to “a process of building relationships of mutual obligation and trust across community sectors” (Johns, Kilpatrick, Falk & Mulford 2001, p. 20). The most common forms of formal participation tend to involve youth councils or youth advisory committees, as part of an ongoing policy direction (McLaren 1995–96, p. 56).

Often, participation can be seen as the cure for apparently deeply divisive social ills like vandalism and concerns about young people’s use of public space (Ackermans 1991; Robins 1996; White 2001).

There is a growing literature on the need for, and the best methodology of, incorporating youth in local government activity. The New South Wales Department of Local Government undertook research to explore youth consultation in that state, and the Tasmanian Government has provided specific guidelines for local governments dealing with young people (Paterson 1999; Tasmanian Office of Youth Affairs 1999). Johns et al. write on the experience of one town in Western Australia, finding that “increased skill and confidence levels, and increased awareness of the way in which the community operates”, acted to keep youth in their localities and increased their participation in community activities (Johns, Kilpatrick, Falk & Mulford 2001, p. 24). Phillips and colleagues write on the problematic notion of “youth consultation”, yet conclude that they are hopeful that it will promote “productive dialogue between and among young people and those working with them” (Phillips, Stacy & Milner 2001, p. 47).

Bessant sounds a cautionary note, arguing that in “varying degrees many youth policies in the twentieth century and into the twenty-first have reflected an enmity toward young people that has been disrespectful of their most basic human rights”. The partial solution lies, she states, in ceding authority to young people “in terms of developing and facilitating the very processes of consultation-participation” (Bessant 2002, p. 39). Stacey et al. write of “Youth Participation Accountability” a South Australian-devised strategy to “achieve respectful and youth-focused activities and decision-making” (Stacey et al. 2002, p. 46).

15

Although there is a general acceptance of this notion, it is not uncontested. Walther et al. note the existence of “contradictions in the concepts of participation and citizen-ship” (Walther, Hejl & Jensen 2002, p.3). There is some doubt about the efficacy of participation, and also about the potential for extended control implicit in the practice. Some believe that the practice of youth participation can be problematic and dominated by school leaders (McLaren 1995–96, p. 58), or have a “hidden agenda” about the need to create “good citizens” (Stacey et al. 2002, p. 45). Palmer worries, too, about the totalitarian echoes in discourses of participation and community development (Palmer 2002).

Community development and capacity building

In recent years a new set of languages about community development has emerged, talk often littered with ideas inherited both from communitarianism and neo-liberal discourse (Bessant 1997; Brennan 1998; Harris 1999; Rose 1999). In this new language problems are a reflection of young people’s declining levels of inclusion in civic life, exclusion that reflects their loss of community. According to this thesis, something has gone awfully wrong with the social fabric and community participation. Advocates of the new community development approach desire to develop social capital, build community

capacity, encourage partnerships, support community entrepreneurship, highlight the need for sustainable and healthy com-munities, and strengthen democratic and civic participation. The solution to young people’s ills lies in the building of civic associations, as these produce “networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate coordination, and cooperation for human development” (Putnam 1995, p. 67).

This new emphasis on community development has seen a move by local government towards policy work, organising and supporting existing community groups, and a shift by some away from direct youth service provision. Many councils are more inclined to see their role as supporting community groups to manage their own affairs, than directly responding to the needs of young people themselves.

ConclusionLocal government attempts to engage

young people have to be located in the broader context of changes in focus of local government, especially in the past three decades. They are also the result of diverse and often contradictory discourses, or ways of talking and thinking about young people and their place in society. These discourses frame explicitly and implicitly the policies and programs for young people featured in this report.

Chapter 2Young people, participation and local government

IntroductionInformation in this chapter is based on

the results from the online survey of local government services to young people across Australia. The survey instrument is presented in Appendix 3. The purpose of the survey was to: ascertain the range of services and programs provided by local government (from the most traditional services such as recreation facilities and libraries to the most recent and unusual); determine the target groups, funding, governance, and methods of service provision; outline youth services staff employed; and to invite local governments to nominate programs they considered innovative, which would form the basis for our case studies.

At an analytical level, we were interested to see how the recent discourses of community development, capacity building, and participation have influenced the develop-

ment of services for young people. Although it was unlikely that the online survey would reveal much of this, we hoped that the responses would provide enough information to determine if further exploration for a case study was warranted. We also wanted to see if outsourcing of community services, reported in the literature, was apparent in the data.

The chapter outlines the main findings from the survey data. The first section describes responses to the survey. Next we discuss the range of services provided across the country, including the target groups of services, funding of programs, and modes of governance involving young people. In the following section an outline of the method of service provision is provided, specifically the extent to which services are provided in-house or contracted out to other agencies. Finally there is a discussion of the “best” services nominated by respondents.

3Youth services and other activities in local government

in Australia


Survey response The online survey produced 219 useable

submissions out of a possible 6141, which represents 35.7 per cent of LGAs nationally (Table 1). Submissions were only considered if they had verifiable contact details. Victoria provided proportionately more returns (56.4%) than any other jurisdiction and the Northern Territory had the lowest number of completed surveys (9.2%). Limited and/or difficult online access may explain the low return from the NT. Hard copy versions of the survey were mailed to more than 30 remote, primarily Indigenous, LGAs, most of which were located

in the Territory and remote Queensland. No useable responses were received from the two mailed surveys returned. For most people in these communities, English is a second language and a written survey not the most appropriate mechanism for data collection. Attempts at telephone contact were not successful. The complex issues facing remote communities mean that surveys of this kind are, understandably, unlikely to be regarded as a high priority. Interpretation of the survey data needs to take the response rate, and specifically those LGAs not well represented, into account.

Table 1: Survey response by state and territory

State Frequency Per cent Per cent of total sample

New South Wales 57 26.0 33.1Western Australia 50 22.8 35.2Victoria 44 20.1 56.4Queensland 25 11.4 20.0South Australia 24 11.0 35.3Tasmania 13 5.9 44.8Northern Territory 6 2.7 9.2Total 219 100 N/A

Note: Differences in recording LGAs in the NT exist between the ABS and the NT Local Government Association. We use the NT LGA’s larger figure, as it includes all self-governing communities.

The ratio of metropolitan (or capital city) responses to non-metropolitan responses to the survey is set out in Table 2. The distinction between metro-politan and non-metropolitan LGAs is problematic, with LGAs on the rural-city border difficult to categorise. Allowing for some indeterminacy, the responses from South Australia and Victoria were equally likely to come from non-metropolitan areas as from the metropolitan area. In New South Wales, the Northern Territory and Western Australia, roughly a third of all responses came from the metropolitan area. In Tasmania the metropolitan res-

ponse rate was 25 per cent. Queensland figures were anomalous, with only 12 per cent of responses from that State coming from the metropolitan area.

Decentralisation and significant differ-ences in population densities throughout Australia also make the distinction between metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas problematic. The Cairns City Council in far north Queensland, for example, is non-metropolitan, yet it governs 119 000 people; Fremantle City Council is part of the Perth metropolitan area, but services only 26 000 people.

1 This figure was reached by adding the figures from the various state/territory figures. It excludes the special case of the ACT, which is a single

government entity. The database supplied by the ALGA comprises 695 organisations, but some of these are regional groupings and other “sub-peak” groupings. If we use that as a base, the response rate was 31.5%.

19

Table 2: Metropolitan and non-metropolitan survey responses

State Metro Non-Metro Ratio

South Australia 12 12 1:1Victoria 22 22 1:1New South Wales 21 36 1:2Northern Territory 2 4 1:2Western Australia 17 34 1:2Tasmania 3 9 1:3Queensland 3 23 1:8

Range of services and other activitiesOne of the main aims of this research was

to provide a snapshot of the range of the services, programs, and policies aimed at young people being provided by LGAs across the nation. Councils were asked to choose from a selected list of services their council provided. Those services not identified specifically could be listed in an “other”

category. Not surprisingly, given the survey was targeting youth services, the majority of respondents (94.1%) declared that they provided specific services and programs for young people (Table 3). However, 13 respondents (5.9%) declared that they provided no such services. Of these, six came from Western Australia.

Chapter 3Youth services and other activities in local government in Australia

Table 3: Local government services provided for young people

Program/policy/service Frequency Per cent

Recreation programs for young people 159 72.6Library services for young people 147 67.1Community – young people policies 131 59.8Leadership programs for young people 126 57.5Arts/crafts programs for young people 119 54.3Advisory services 110 50.2Sports programs for young people 105 47.9Personal development programs for young people 102 46.6Youth crime prevention 96 43.8Outreach programs 79 36.1At-risk programs 77 35.2Drama/theatre programs for young people 71 32.4Women’s programs/policies/services (specifically) 61 27.9Counselling services for young people 51 23.3Employment training services for young people 51 23.3Indigenous young people 48 21.9Drug and alcohol counselling/programs/services 47 21.5NES background young people 40 18.3Health services for young people 35 16.0

Continued next page


Program/policy/service Frequency Per cent

Welfare programs 32 14.6Men’s programs/policies/services (specifically) 31 14.2Sexual health counselling 29 13.2Mental health services for young people 28 12.8Accommodation (crisis and/or medium/long-term) 20 9.1Other programs/policies/services for young people 87 39.7

The services most frequently reported were recreation programs (72.6% of respondents) and library services (67.1%). While library services are part of traditional local government provision to the general community, recreation programs for young people are more specifically targeted. As illustrated later, recreation continues to be the dominant activity sponsored by local government to encourage the participation of young people. Next in importance came “community” policies (59.8%), “leadership” programs (57.5%), arts/crafts programs (54.3%), advisory services (50.2%), sports programs (47.9%) and personal development programs (46.6%).

While the arts/crafts, sports and even personal development programs can be seen as an extension of a traditional focus on recreation, the development of policy and advisory services, and programs aimed at fostering leadership stem from more recent developments in local government aimed at a broader orientation towards community development and “capacity building”.

Programs aimed at diverting young people from crime and other risky behaviours are next in importance, with youth crime prevention (43.8%), outreach programs (36.1%) and at-risk programs (35.2%) offered by a large number of councils. In

addition to these programs, are a diverse range of support programs offered either to specific target groups: young women (27.9%), young men (14.2%), Indigenous young people (21.9%), and Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) young people (18.3%), or for specific health and social issues: counselling (23.3%), employment (23.3%), general health (16.0%), drug and alcohol programs (21.5%), welfare (14.6%), sexual health (13.2%), mental health (12.8%), and accommodation (9.1%).

Respondents were asked to list any services, policies, or programs they provided that were not offered in the list of identified services. There were 105 responses (47.9%) which included: centres or other infrastructure (18%); business partnerships (16%); and IT/one-stop-shops (10%). The most common examples of the last category were email cafés, online interaction, web sites and physical meeting places where the exchange of information appears to be central. Respondents were asked which services and programs provided for the whole community were also used by young people. More than three quarters of the sample (77.6%) reported that they provided general services that were used by young people. The most commonly cited services were libraries, followed by recreation and sporting services.

Continued from previous page

21

The same areas predominated when respondents were asked to identify recreational facilities provided by their council (Table 4). Libraries were most frequently cited (93.2%), and a wide range of sporting facilities – cricket grounds (90.9%), basketball courts (84.5%), swimming pools (84.5%), skate parks (80.7%), tennis courts (79.9%), Australian Rules football ovals (75.8%), soccer grounds (72.1%), Rugby fields (54.3%), hockey fields (53.4%), BMX parks

(42.0%), roller-skating arenas (9.6%), and ice-skating arenas (2.7%). These sporting facilities illustrate both continuity and change in Australia’s sporting history, and the regional popularity of particular codes. Other facilities included meeting halls (84.5%), Internet/email facilities (71.2%) and community centres for young people (45.2%). While meeting halls have long been provided by local government, online facilities and spaces set apart for young people are more recent additions.

Table 4: Recreational facilities provided by local government

Facilities Frequency Per cent

Libraries 204 93.2Cricket grounds 199 90.9Basketball courts 185 84.5Swimming pools 185 84.5Meeting halls 185 84.5Skate parks 177 80.7Tennis courts 175 79.9Australian Rules football ovals 166 75.8Internet/email facilities 156 71.2Soccer grounds 158 72.1Club rooms 140 63.9Rugby fields 119 54.3Hockey fields 117 53.4Community centres for young people 99 45.2BMX parks 92 42.0Roller-skating arenas 21 9.6Ice-skating arenas 6 2.7None 1 0.5Other facilities 42 19.2

Respondents were able to identify other recreation facilities not previously listed. As with the earlier question relating to services and programs, many of those listed (centres, swimming pools, BMX and skate facilities) could have been incorporated in the previous table. The most obvious additional category listed as “Other” recreational

facilities was that of “Parks”. This category covered a range of walks, tracks, and other passive activities. Numerous respondents also noted that lands were made available for other unspecified activities. Additional sporting facilities included equestrian arenas, rodeo facilities, polocrosse fields, and riding tracks.



Incomplete information means that it is not possible to determine what facilities were provided for surfing and waterskiing, for example, or what differences, if any, there are between various categories of centres/venues.

Target groupsApart from simply identifying those

services designed for young people, we were attempting to determine which particular sub-

groups of young people are targeted by local government (Table 5). Young people deemed to be “at risk” (61.2%) were overwhelmingly the group most often selected as a target of LGA services and programs. Young people who were unemployed (43.8%) or Indigenous (42.0%) were also identified as important target groups, followed by young people with disabilities (36.1%), from CALD backgrounds (31.5%), gays and lesbians (25.1%), women (24.7%), and men (19.2%).

Table 5: Target groups of local government youth services

Target group Frequency Per cent

Young people at risk 134 61.2Unemployed young people 96 43.8Indigenous young people 92 42.0Young people with disabilities 79 36.1Young people from CALD background 69 31.5Gay and lesbian young people 55 25.1Young women (only) 54 24.7Young men (only) 42 19.2None of the above 17 7.8Other 71 32.9

When asked to nominate other target groups not identified, the 71 respondents (32.9%) provided diverse answers, but most claimed they served all young people in their LGA. While a number of councils indicated that they provided services to marginalised groups of young people (such as the homeless, those in low socio-economic circumstances, and refugees), a few were keen to emphasise that their programs were for “mainstream” young people.

Others declared target groups that could have fitted into one of the categories of Table 5. For instance, one respondent mentioned binge drinking which could easily fit the “at-risk” category, for example. Two nominated “homeless youth”, which

might also fit in the “at-risk” category. These examples remind us of the fluidity and mutability of such categories. The “age-based” category arose from respondents citing particular age groups as their target recipients. When asked what age range they dealt with in youth services, the majority reported working with young people around the 12–18 or 12–24 year age range.

FundingRespondents were asked to declare their

main source of funding for youth services (Table 6). Almost all respondents declared multiple sources of funding for youth services, with local government rates and charges cited most frequently (78.5%), followed by state or territory government

23

Table 6: Main sources of funding for local government youth services

Funding source Frequency Per cent

Local government rates and charges 172 78.5State or territory government funding 140 63.9Commonwealth government funding 64 29.2Non-government organisations 24 11.0Private enterprise 19 8.7Lotteries 18 8.2Fee-for-service 16 7.3Other 13 5.9

funding (63.9%), Commonwealth govern-ment funding (29.2%), non-government organisations (11.0%), private enterprise (8.7%), lotteries (8.2%), fee-for-service (7.3%), and other funding sources (5.9%).

The lotteries funding figures are of note. Of the 18 positive responses, all but one came from Western Australia (34%) – the other came from South Australia. The Western Australia figure reflects the introduction of the Lotterywest funding scheme which provides a range of targeted and general grants to community-based organisations and local government authorities in Western Australia.

The fee-for-service category is also of interest. Although comparatively few services

were funded in this manner, 13.9 per cent of Victorian respondents nominated this source of funding, compared to the national average of 6.9 per cent. No respondents from South Australia or the Northern Territory declared any fee-for-service funding.

GovernanceAn important aspect of the research

was an attempt to explore the ways in which local government authorities around Australia engaged with young people. Most respondents (94.1%) reported their LGA provided opportunities for young people to take part in the planning of relevant services. 196 respondents (89.5%) described how that involvement occurred (Table 7).


Table 7: Participation by young people in local government

Forms of youth participation Frequency

Youth advisory committee/groups 89Youth/junior council 46Youth fora 35Ad hoc consultation 34Steering committees/working groups (project based) 32None 9Annual fora/surveys 6FReeZA 4Web/email 4Peak bodies 2HYPE 1


The responses can be divided into those which report some formal means by which young people are engaged, and a wide range of more informal mechanisms. The former include youth advisory committees, youth advisory groups, and youth/junior councils and more than half of the sample reported arrangements of this kind. Less formal participation reported included steering committees or working groups which were formed to oversee a particular project (such as, an arts event), annual fora at which the views of young people are invited, electronic networks, and other mechanisms, such as HYPE – a Western Australian program aimed at “Helping Young People Engage” in their local community – and FReeZA, aimed at assisting young people in Victoria to organise and run cultural, especially rock music, events.

In kind supportCouncils were also given the opportunity

to identify in-kind support, such as one-off small grants, premises or use of facilities, they provided to young people (Table 8). “Community young people groups” were the most commonly nominated organisations in receipt of LGA support (71.7%), followed by

“Youth recreation groups” (63%) and “Youth sports groups” (62.1%). These are the most generalised description of groups that might receive support. As the descriptions become more specific, the response rate diminishes.

It is worth noting that 23 respondents (10.5% of the sample) indicated that they provided grants that any group might apply for. This is in keeping with earlier responses which declared that their council provided services for all young people, rather than specific groups of young people.

Method of service provisionGiven the recent debate about the

outsourcing of community services in local government we wanted to explore methods of youth service provision. Respondents were asked whether listed services were provided in-house, by external contractor, or both in-house and externally (Tables 9–10). They were allowed only single responses to each category, with the in-house category the default position.

The more general the description of the service, or the more traditional its history as a local government activity, the more likely it was to be delivered in-house.

Table 8: Groups in receipt of in-kind support from local government

Groups supported Frequency Per cent

Community young people 157 71.7Youth recreation 138 63.0Youth sports clubs 136 62.1Youth school 107 48.9Youth arts/craft 104 47.5Youth drama/theatre 89 40.6Church or religion-based young people 83 37.9Scouts or Girl Guides 81 37.0Rural young people 49 22.4YMCA 30 13.7Other youth groups 61 27.9

25Chapter 3Youth services and other activities in local government in Australia

Table 9: In-house provision of youth services

Service Frequency Per cent

Library services for young people 166 75.8Community – young people policies 153 69.9Advisory services 119 54.3Crime prevention 97 44.3Recreation programs 89 40.6Personal development 88 40.2Sports 78 35.6Policies for young women 69 31.5At-risk programs 69 31.5Arts/crafts 66 30.1Outreach programs 66 30.1Indigenous young people policies 65 29.7Policies for young men 59 26.9NES policies 55 25.1Counselling 53 24.4Employment/training 45 20.5Drama/theatre 42 19.2Drug/alcohol services 42 19.2Welfare programs 41 18.7Health 36 16.4Mental health 34 15.5Sexual health counselling 30 13.7Accommodation 28 12.8Curfews 20 9.1Other program/services 92 42.0

Libraries, generic youth services, recreation and sport, were all frequently cited as in-house programs. The prominence of crime prevention services (44.3%) provided in-house reflects councils’ responses to the increasing emphasis on law and order issues demanded by many ratepayers.

Specialist health and welfare programs were less likely to be delivered in-house. These included mental and sexual health services, drug and alcohol programs and other health and welfare programs. One anomaly illustrated in Table 9 is the appearance of curfews, cited by nine per cent of the

sample as being provided in-house, but not identified previously in Table 3 (youth services provided by local government).

Fewer respondents identified services which were delivered by external contractors by their council (Table 10). As indicated above those services most likely to be delivered in this mode are specialist health and welfare services, as well as drama/theatre activities.

Youth services workersOne of the means by which to determine

local government’s involvement in youth services, is to explore the people specifically


employed to work with young people. Respondents were asked to identify the types of people they employed to work with young people, and could check multiple answers. These responses were then collapsed into six broad categories (Table 11). While some of the position titles are descriptive (for example, recreation officer), others reflect

the more generic job descriptions many workers in these areas have. Just under half of all workers identified (48.1%) were in the youth development category. Less than a quarter (22.6%) were employed in the arts/recreation/sport categories, and a smaller number (13.9%) in positions in the outreach/social worker/disability categories.

Table 10: Local government youth services by external contractor

Service Frequency Per cent

Sexual health counselling 38 17.4

Health 33 15.1

Drama/theatre 33 15.1

Mental health 31 14.2

Employment/training 30 13.7

Drug/alcohol services 30 13.7

Arts/crafts 28 12.8

Outreach programs 28 12.8

Counselling 25 11.4

Accommodation 23 10.5

Sports 23 10.5

At-risk programs 23 10.5

Welfare programs 19 8.7

Recreation programs 16 7.3

Personal development 13 5.9

Policies for young women 13 5.9

Policies for young men 12 5.5

Library services 11 5.0

Crime prevention 8 3.7

Advisory services 7 3.2

Indigenous young people’s policies 5 2.3

NES policies 4 1.8

Community – young people’s policy 3 1.4

Curfews 3 1.4

Other programs/services 3 1.4

27

Table 11: Youth services employees of local government

Employees Frequency Per cent

Youth development workers 234 48.1Arts/recreation/sports workers 110 22.6Outreach/social/disability workers 68 14.0Employment workers 5 1.0Accommodation workers 5 1.0Migrant workers 5 1.0Other 59 12.1

The grouping of social workers with outreach workers rather than “youth” workers is problematic, but the general trend is apparent. The most common position titles are those involving the term “youth”, and might be described as “general” youth positions. The largest number of task specific positions was that aligned with recreational, artistic and sporting matters. Outreach work, which combines aspects of general “youth” work, recreational activities, and adds a level of “at-risk” and “health” concerns, was the next most nominated category.

When asked to nominate other workers not described previously, there were two categories of interest. The first was community development officers which, in retrospect, should have been included as a general employment category as 14.6 per

cent of the sample identified this category. A similar number of responses identified a generic youth participation category, which included people working on youth projects and events.

InnovationOne of the objectives of the research was

to identify innovative programs or services which might be successfully applied elsewhere. 133 respondents (60.7%) declared that they had innovative programs and around half the sample (50.7%) provided details of these (Table 12).

The categories of programs in Table 12 have been collapsed from the wide range of responses. Some programs are identified in more than one category: for example, a crime prevention program involving camps

Table 12: Innovative programs for young people by local government

Programs Frequency Per cent

YAC/plan/IT/coordination 32 18.1Education/employment 31 17.5Recreation/art 31 17.5Community/personal/leadership development 26 14.7Health/outreach 21 11.9Infrastructure 12 6.8Crime/safety 10 5.6Indigenous/awareness 8 4.5No programs 6 3.4



is listed as both a crime/safety program and a recreation program. There was also a problem to do with the categorisation of innovative services/programs in varying stages of development – from planning to developing an integrated service model, having created one and about to implement it, to working within an existing model. All these examples have been listed in the YAC/plan/IT/coordination category and deal with ideas about the style or form of interaction between local governments and young people, rather than a service directed at particular needs. This was the most frequently cited category of innovative programs.

A similar number of programs were concerned with education or employment, and recreation or art. Slightly fewer programs on community or personal development were nominated, followed by health and outreach programs. Less frequently cited were programs providing infrastructure, dealing with crime and safety, and Indigenous awareness. Six councils declared that they offered no current innovative programs.

Profiles of local government youth services

Data in this chapter is subject to many limitations, including the size of the sample, and difficulties categorising some material. Another limitation has been the fragmented view this type of quantitative data provides of youth services. This is overcome, in part, by the case studies presented later, which explore in some detail, innovative programs identified by councils. However, it is useful to have some picture of youth services provided within a single local government in very different parts of Australia.

What becomes clear is the role that local government plays in activities other

than direct service provision, particularly the importance of policy development, advocacy and liaison, and the resourcing of and support for diverse community groups delivering services to young people.

Moreland City Council, Melbourne Moreland City Council articulates as part

of its general mandate, working with young people aged 11 to 25 years to help develop and build skills as well as promote active participation in the community. Young people are listed as one of many council priority areas. In the council plan for 2002 to 2005 it is claimed that:

Council will ensure that young people are represented in council decision-making structures and given the oppor-tunity to participate more fully in the community. Youth Summits, organised and run by young people, will continue to be supported and encouraged.

Council is committed to providing a diverse range of sports and recreation facilities and activities for Moreland’s young people.

Moreland City Council involves itself in a range of youth programs, including the following:

• the Moreland Push Start band heat is coordinated by Moreland City Council’s Youth Services section. It provides an opportunity for young unsigned bands to participate in drug and alcohol free events;

• the Moreland Youth Services program provides information and advice to young people, directly and in liaison with other service providers, on a wide range of health and social issues;

• the Moreland Youth Music Committee is made up of young people from 12–25 years. It is supported by council youth

29

workers and plans and regularly carries out drug and alcohol free music events;

• council staff also offer a range of activities for young people during school holidays. The program operates from various venues in Moreland and participants are charged according to their family’s level of income;

• council youth workers support a number of local neighbourhood youth groups including the Brunswick, Coburg, Fawkner and Glenroy Youth Groups;

• council has appointed a Family Liaison Worker who provides counselling and support for young people and/or their families;

• a number of homework and study groups and tuition to students attending local secondary schools;

• a book bursary program with financial assistance towards the purchase of school books;

• an orientation program into local services and recreational opportunities for newly arrived young people; and

• the Moonah Community Group, a community strengthening initiative described in detail later in this report.

Moreland Council also hosts regular Youth Summits. These events, planned and organised by Moreland’s Youth Advisory Committee, bring together council representatives, youth service providers and young people who work, live or study in Moreland to take part in discussing issues and concerns that are of importance to young people. Recommendations from these events are taken to council and shape council’s youth policy. In addition, council plans to prepare a Youth Strategy by late 2003.

Darwin City Council, Darwin

Darwin City Council supports a range of youth and youth policy initiatives. Council has developed a Youth Strategy as a guide to the planning of youth services and council’s future directions. Council officers also support a Youth Advisory Group designed to act as a consultative group to feed information and ideas to council. The Youth Advisory Group is made up of young people aged 12–20 and meets regularly to discuss youth issues, needs and future directions. The Youth Advisory Group are consulted when council is undertaking planning or organising events that could have an impact on young people. Increasingly, councillors refer matters to the Youth Advisory Group or seek out their advice on specific issues. The Youth Advisory Group also works on the planning of youth projects and events.

Other youth services offered through the council include the following:

• a project called Graffik Measures. This 12-month project was funded by the NT Department of Justice and draws upon the skills and activities of young aerosol artists in Darwin suburbs. These artists created a series of urban art murals on council’s public toilet blocks. Design and planning workshops were coordinated by council staff as a crime prevention strategy;

• the production and updating of a Youth Services Directory which is available for download on a web site. This booklet provides a comprehensive guide to youth services in the Darwin area. Hard copies are also available for those who do not have Internet access;

• a Youth Information Card designed for young people who need the contact details of youth services in Darwin;



• the GRIND newspaper, produced by young people, and described in detail later in the report; and

• the provision of an informal information hub, through the Youth Development Officer, for a local network of youth services workers in Darwin.

ConclusionThe youth practice undertaken by local

government throughout Australia is diverse, and ranges from the most traditional, in the form of library and recreation services, to the more recent attractions of information technology and electronic communication. In addition to providing direct services to young people many local governments are taking on work in the areas of policy, planning and community support. Particularly since the rise in popularity of community development,

local governments are committing more resources to assist others to engage with young people.

It appears that local governments are taking a more prominent role in the provision of education, employment and training for young people than in the past, with just under half the sample providing services in these areas. It is also clear that services are delivered by a diverse combination of in-house and external providers.

Ideas about the participation of young people are woven through many of the services listed, illustrated by the large number of youth advisory groups identified and number of innovative programs cited in this area. Notions of the development of young people – whether personal or community focused – are also prominent. These ideas are explored later in the report.

Purpose of the case studiesThe survey results provide a snapshot

of local government youth services and activities across Australia. Like much quantitative data, they furnish basic answers to the questions relating to “what” services are offered, but nothing on the “how” and “why” they have been developed. Case studies have become an important device for illustrating qualitative aspects of programs, institutions, or activities which allow the reader to understand some of the rationale, history and development behind the initiative. While case studies do not have the generalisability of some quantitative studies, with other qualitative research, they can provide more valid data as the researcher is able to interrogate the data during interviews and observations. For many people, including local government and other youth practitioners, students and academics, these ethnographies of youth work practice in local government are also

likely to be more credible and certainly more readable than statistical overviews of youth services and activities as they take the reader through everyday practice.

The case studies illustrate the diversity of local government services and activities for young people, identify the material and social ingredients needed to develop and maintain programs, and should contain enough detail for others to decide if such an initiative might work in their area. While each of the programs is unique, the sections on achievements and challenges of the respective programs alert the reader to what works and why. The case studies are not intended as a definitive list of best practice local government services, but rich examples of the broad range of very different programs across Australia. The case studies in these next five chapters inform the final two chapters on models of youth practice and on a framework for quality in local government youth practice. Readers more

4Reading and telling

their own stories


interested in these general issues may wish to read those chapters first, and refer back to the case studies for specific details.

Data for the case studies was collected during field visits to each site (see Appendix 1 for details on case study selection and data collection) and involved interviews with key stakeholders, including young people, and observations of programs in action, wherever possible.

The case studies have been arranged in loose themes: reading and telling their own stories; places and spaces for young people, flexible services for mobile outreach; engaging with Indigenous young people; and service delivery through the “one-stop-shop”.

IntroductionIn these case studies we refer to three

innovative programs which encourage young people to engage positively with their communities through their own newspaper, theatre group, and library program. These programs stimulate young people to write, act and read about themselves and other young people, using a wide range of literacies to narrate these stories to others. They illustrate the point that many young people want more than skate parks and computer games, even those with modest literacy levels. The different media – newspaper, theatre and books – allow for the extension of different skills and creative worlds and connect the young people to people and settings with which they may never have come into contact.

The GRIND Youth Newspaper – Darwin City Council

The GRIND Youth Newspaper is a youth initiative of the Darwin City Council that seeks to support the promotion of positive images and achievements of young people,

showcasing and demonstrating to the Darwin community their vibrancy, creativity and activity. The newspaper provides a means for young people to have a voice and articulate their interests, views and ideas. As Tara Collins, an editor in 2001, said, “we want young people all over Darwin to have a new and interesting paper that isn’t bagging them”.

History of the initiativeIn early 2000, council staff decided to

fund a pilot youth magazine/newspaper. A small core group of young people met and produced the first edition of GRIND. After the production of the first issue many of these young people turned their attention to other activities and the newspaper ceased production for a period of time.

In 2001 the GRIND newspaper project was redeveloped shortly after the new Youth Services Project Officer took up her appointment. Partly this was shaped by a response to consistent and ongoing negative media coverage of young people in the Darwin area and partly in response to the focus on youth participation in council’s new Youth Strategy, produced in 2000.

GRIND re-emerged in February 2001, beginning with a workshop for young people interested in developing journalism skills and forming a youth team to produce a newspaper. Thirty-five young people came along to the first workshop and remained to develop the paper. Initially the team planned to produce two editions of the newspaper in 2001. This was achieved, and in the following year four editions went to print. Since then council has continued its commitment to the newspaper. The involvement of young people has consistently increased, since the initiative first commenced, so that now there are up to 60 who are regular contributors.

33

The projectSince the newspaper’s inception young

people have been involved in all aspects of the newspaper production process from reporting, editing, creative writing, cartoon production, artwork and printing. Periodically the Youth Services Project Officer works with the team to identify the kind of areas in which they want to develop their skills and they work together to arrange for specialist training and skills workshops for the team. For example, in 2001 the first workshop was facilitated by the NT Writer’s Centre and focused on writing and research skills with a professional journalist. The next workshop was with a panel of local journalists and cartoonists; the following year a MAMBO artist; and this year, local journalists and Wil Anderson, which attracted over 100 young people.

GRIND is produced quarterly with 3 000 copies being distributed through all local high schools, most primary schools, local cinemas, the local Angus & Robertson bookshop (where it is included with every purchase made by a young person), public swimming pools, youth orientated shops and all youth service providers. Each edition of GRIND is also available on the web.

The content of the newspaper is the responsibility of the team with a strong emphasis from council and the GRIND team on the team’s editorial autonomy and the importance of young people producing work uncensored by council. The project attempts to “maximise youth participation and provide young people with a vehicle to have a voice”, and provide “. . . opportunities for young people to develop a sense of belonging and connectedness within their local community” (Darwin City Council Report 29/08/01).

The GRIND team has had between 40–60 young people from a broad range

of backgrounds consistently involved in the production of the newspaper. Those involved range in age from 12–20-year-olds, but with the most active involvement from high school students, diverse areas of residence (with significant numbers of young people who have lived in regional NT), a broad gender split (but with young women regularly taking on important roles in production), and with some cultural diversity (with GRIND attracting a small but growing group of young people from migrant and refugee backgrounds).

The notable exception to this pattern of broad ranging participation has been the lack of Indigenous young people involved. However, there has been some collaborative work between the GRIND team and Indigenous groups. For example, at the February 2002 GRIND skills workshop representatives from the Tiwi Island community attended to gain ideas about how to begin a similar project in their own community.

The council makes available a number of resources to the GRIND team. It has committed a computer and workstation, space around the Youth Services Project Officer, cameras, scanners, film, printers, taping facilities and production equipment. The project receives most of its funding directly from council, which provided $3 000 for the establishment of GRIND in 2001 and committed an additional $6 000 in the 2001–2002 financial year. As a part of her duties the council’s Youth Service Project Officer has dedicated hours per week allocated to the project, dependent on the stage of production of the newspaper.

In addition, various community groups and businesses offer financial, in-kind support, opportunities and mentoring to GRIND. This includes:

• assistance with distribution of the newspaper by Angus & Robertson

Chapter 4Reading and telling their own stories


Books, and Birch, Carroll and Coyle cinemas;

• assistance with gaining celebrity inter-views from Darwin Entertainment Centre and Music Industry Development Inc.;

• donations from Angus & Robertson of new books for reviewing;

• donations of CDs from local bands to use for “give-aways”;

• educational tours by the Chief of Staff and editing staff of the Northern Territory News and mentoring from many ABC journalists;

• requests from various community groups for youth journalists to report on com-munity events and activities;

• small donations from local businesses; and

• writing and skills development work-shops offered by the Writer’s Centre.

ParticipationThe GRIND project’s establishment

was premised on council’s commitment to youth participation. Few specific and prescriptive project goals have been imposed from council. According to council staff interviewed, this is one of the most important elements of their commitment to GRIND and something that is considered to be vital to its continued success.

Young people elect those who fill positions and have established and documented the roles and responsibilities of these positions. Except for the Project Coordinator, filled by the Darwin City Council’s Youth Services Project Officer, young people take on all of the identified roles which include:

• a Senior Editor;• a Deputy Editor;• Assistant Editors;• Sub Editors;

• a Chief Photographer;• a Graphics Coordinator;• a Public Relations Officer;• Head of Distribution;• Youth Journalists; and• Photographers.

As GRIND Headquarters are physically located in council offices this necessitates young people entering secure areas of council. One effect of this is that young people become familiar with the daily operations of a local government authority, meet council officers and council representatives and are involved in the process of local governance in a concrete and applied way.

A number of members of the GRIND team are also members of other youth participatory forums including Darwin City Council’s Youth Advisory Council and the Northern Territory Chief Minister’s Round Table of Young Territorians.

AchievementsA key achievement of the group has been the

quarterly publication of a newspaper of sound quality. As the Youth Services Project Officer remarked, “meeting deadlines and getting out an issue of the paper is always a major achievement”. In late 2002 young people’s autonomy and capacity to carry out work was subjected to a critical test. With little warning council’s Youth Services Project Officer was forced to take bereavement leave. This meant that she was unable to act as the newspaper’s coordinator. This role was taken up by young people and the following issue of GRIND went to print largely unaided by adults.

The consistent publication of stories that examine young people’s positive contribution to Darwin was also declared to be a major accomplishment. As the paper’s 17-year-old Public Relations Officer, Matt Cornell, said in

35

a newspaper story covered in the NT News, “what GRIND does is not just achieve and not just get youth who have ideas into doing something constructive, it showcases it”.

There were also a number of unexpected positive outcomes cited by those involved with GRIND. Council staff claimed that young people’s presence in council offices had an important influence on other council staff, challenging many ideas about youth as a risk and demonstrating that young people were capable of constructive work. Indeed one council officer claims that as a consequence of the GRIND team members regularly frequenting council “I’ve found a change of heart in terms of youth issues . . . when we began GRIND, staff were really nervous about having young people around in secure areas . . . now they think it’s terrific”. It became the practice of some council officers to draw on and draw in young people during the course of their work. For example, GRIND members have been asked to take up casual work at various council functions, particularly events such as the council’s “Fun in the Parks” program. Occasionally groups have contacted council requesting the services of an artist. At other times young people have been asked for their assistance in translating what one officer described as “youth sector speak” into language that had wider public accessibility.

Over time GRIND’s contribution to the council’s Youth Advisory Group (YAG) has increased. In addition, GRIND provides an important forum for the airing of issues that are on the agenda of YAG, often being asked to write stories of importance to the YAG. The successes of GRIND have also helped the YAG gain credibility, particularly amongst councillors and other community members who do not understand the distinction between each group. According to a senior council staff member, “council are now

more inclined to pass on responsibility to YAG because they have seen the product that GRIND has produced and are confident young people can actually do good work”.

Another unintended consequence of GRIND has been opportunities created for young people to participate in media. For example, a number of GRIND journalists have themselves been interviewed by local media outlets including local newspapers, SBS and ABC radio. A former editor of GRIND, Chris Carter, has gained a cadetship with the NT News. This year, “Stateline” filmed a documentary on GRIND and many of the team were involved in this.

A consistent claim in relation to the success of the project is that young people are both actively involved in carrying out work that they identify as important and “have a sense of ownership” in each step of the process. As one young person said, “we get to decide on all the rules, whether that be in meetings or in the newspaper”.

All of those interviewed also partly attributed the project’s success to the energy, dedication and commitment of the council’s Youth Services Project Officer, the leadership of council’s Community Services Department and some particular council aldermen. Together these people act as a resource, often undertaking duties and following through with jobs at the request of young people. They have also been instrumental in building the skills and confidence of young people in terms of media production and writing. The council’s financial commitment to the project, and its provision of basic media equipment, has also been crucial to GRIND’s continuing success.

Some also identified the theme of the paper, countering negative media imagery of young people’s contribution and successes as an important ingredient that shapes



the success of this initiative. According to council officers, this emphasis on strengths and achievements further generates “the general spirit of expectation that things can be achieved”.

The financial and in-kind support offered from local media outlets, journalists and businesses is essential to GRIND’s ongoing sustainability, for a number of reasons. Mentoring and skills development offered by local journalists and writers is of critical importance, not only in relation to the quality of the newspaper but also in providing excitement and motivation for young people who get to work with high profile personalities and skilled professionals. As one young woman said, “giving young people the chance to work side by side with Kate Carter [a local ABC presenter] has got to be one of the most exciting things young people can do . . . when you’re given these opportunities you take them”.

The combined elements of fun, food and friendship were also cited as important ingredients for the success of GRIND. All young informants made the point that these were three of the most important reasons why young people enjoy and hence participate in the process. As one young person said, “GRIND meetings and working together is fun . . . without this we would soon lose interest”.

Finally, both council officers and GRIND members believe that one of the important elements in the success of GRIND is that “there is always work to be done . . . this is one of the best things about it . . . and the work is different . . . you are not sitting around just talking, or just going to an event and watching it . . . you have always got plenty to do”.

ChallengesOne challenge articulated by young people

was that confronted by senior students with decreasing amounts of time to contribute

to the newspaper as a consequence of the increasing demands of study. This is further compounded by the fact that young people’s success as contributors to GRIND often led to additional requests that they be involved in other youth participatory activities external to council.

Another challenge was the tensions between involving a broad range of young people, managing diverse interests, nurturing young members and meeting production deadlines. Not surprisingly older and more confident members of the team often dominated meetings and took on more central roles in production. In the longer- term the paper’s sustainability is dependent upon new members learning and taking on leadership over time.

Initially gaining access to the council building was difficult for young people. Particularly in the wake of September 11, the Bali bombing and the anthrax scare security risk management and fears about security breaches were heightened. Understandably there were those amongst council staff who were reticent to agree to people other than staff members being allowed into an otherwise secure area. After it was agreed that there were significant advantages to having the GRIND team work inside council offices there were still logistical problems associated with getting young people through security, but these were resolved to the satisfaction of both council staff and the young people involved.

Another tension identified was the difficulty of maintaining a commitment to the editorial rights of young people and maximum youth involvement while guaranteeing significant quality and not offending readership. A youth newspaper with little outside censorship, particularly one supported by a council, is a risky endeavour. When the

37

paper was first mooted some councillors were understandably reticent about the political consequences should people take offence to the newspaper’s content. As one person commented, “a newspaper like this needs to be of significant quality to hold the front”.

Short Fuse Youth Theatre Group – Town of Kwinana

Short Fuse is a youth theatre group supported by the Town of Kwinana in Western Australia. It was founded in 1998 by a small group of young people meeting after school to develop their own youth theatre company. As the Youth Arts Officer from the Town of Kwinana says, “Short Fuse is made up of some of the most passionate, honest and creative people who want to let others get to share in the dreams and aspirations of those who are proud to make Kwinana home”.

The Town of Kwinana, in the south-western metropolitan area of Perth, Western Australia, has 20 000 residents. It has long battled with the stigma associated with being the town servicing the Perth metropolitan region’s largest industrial strip. However, it is also nestled in the midst of tuart forest and banksia bush only a few kilometres from the coast and the Cockburn Sound.

Kwinana has some of the lowest social indicators in Western Australia. As residents of an outer metropolitan area, young people in the region are also relatively isolated from the social, recreational, and employment opportunities available in the inner metropolitan area. However, out of this “low-socio-economic tag” and strong working class and state housing culture has emerged local defiance and a strong sense of community, particularly amongst young people.

History of the initiativeIn 1998 Short Fuse grew out of the idea

by a small group of 15–16-year-old local young people who wanted to establish a youth theatre group. It was important for this group, disgruntled by what they saw as a lack of opportunities offered in high school theatre arts, to create their own company where they could have creative control and ownership. They were particularly keen to start a theatre group so they could showcase their talents and celebrate growing up in an area that produced more richness than was often appreciated.

Initially a core group of young people approached the local Arts Centre requesting free workshop space. At the same time they began to recruit others, raise funds to help buy materials and began to research in preparation for productions. At this point contact was established between members of the group and staff of the youth services team at the Town of Kwinana, a couple of community members and the local Member of Parliament.

The projectWith support from council’s Youth Officer

the group has worked together on a range of community arts initiatives. In 1998 they took a leading role in the “Wave Your Flag Project”, a community cultural development initiative after the Alcoa Mining Company approached the council wishing to support a project that celebrated Kwinana’s solid sense of community spirit and rich cultural diversity. This made it possible for a local young artist to be employed to coordinate the project and support other young artists. This young woman has since continued in this regard, taking on a similar role in other youth arts projects until in 2002 council made the position of Youth Arts Officer permanent. According to those involved, this



person has been the mainstay of youth arts initiatives often acting as the main support and key point of contact between council and Short Fuse.

In 1999 the group of young people, that by now had gained some experience in organising and managing projects, were asked by the local Festival Committee and the arts production group Awesome to help produce Kwinana’s first youth arts festival, FreakFest. This they managed with considerable success.

In 2000 with the help of council staff Short Fuse gained funding from the State Health Department to write and produce “You want to do what with my what”?, a play exploring sexuality and relationships. The play was a major success, touring the state, giving members a chance to work with a professional writer and director and allowing young people to articulate their experiences and issues in a humorous and accessible way. In this same year Short Fuse were again invited to produce and manage the second youth arts festival, FreakFest 2000.

Members of Short Fuse continued to work on a number of small youth arts projects, including a series of urban arts projects, at the same time as manage the annual FreakFest events. In 2002 after the overwhelming success of various FreakFest events the group capitalised upon the momentum created to launch a program of regular theatre workshops for local young people. The group successfully applied for a small grant from the State Arts Department so that they could run regular theatre workshops catering to 15–25-year-olds.

The aim of these workshops has been to:

• develop voice and movement skills;

• work on character development and improvisation;

• develop understanding of status and its role improvisation;

• develop skills of physical theatre;• explore text and script development; and• build confidence, self-esteem and

creativity.

Over four years Short Fuse has grown from an idea of a small number of local young people to a talented youth theatre company that has a membership of over 100 young people. They now employ two part-time staff and deliver four workshops a week.

Not only has Short Fuse shaped the way young people are perceived but it has influenced the way people think about living in Kwinana. In addition, the company has come to influence the way council works with young people and the commitment councillors have to local young people, evidenced by council funding of the Youth Arts Officer position.

ParticipationShort Fuse is a youth theatre company,

managed and run by young people. Young people are the active membership of Short Fuse with some support from council’s Youth Services Team. No specific and prescriptive project goals have been imposed from council.

Consistently throughout its history members of the Short Fuse team have also contributed to other youth and community events and groups including cultural festivals and the town’s Youth Advisory Council. In fact all of the performances and events Short Fuse are involved in have a strong emphasis on the participation of young people.

The company itself has a commitment to produce work that challenges the way young people are portrayed and the taken for granted ideas about living in the Kwinana

39

community. In this way Short Fuse creates opportunities for young people to build performance skills, give a public voice to local youth issues as well as challenge the idea that young people from Kwinana have a limited contribution to make. In addition, the group has been the gateway through which a number of local young people have entered the arts field.

AchievementsShort Fuse has consistently contributed to

the planning and running of the local youth arts festival FreakFest. Last year the festival attracted 1 000 visitors to the festival site with approximately 270 young people directly involved in art projects leading up to and during the festival.

The Short Fuse production “You want to do what with my what”? was made up of a cast of 28 young people and attracted audiences in excess of 800. The performance of this piece of theatre attracted considerable public attention and acclaim, particularly for its treatment of the experiences of young people struggling with sexual identity and the issues confronting sexuality and relationships. Like all of its productions, “You want to do what with my what”? was written by the young performers and drew heavily on the themes they considered important in the language and style they chose.

The continued existence of Short Fuse over four years is itself a major achievement. As the Youth Arts Officer from the Town of Kwinana said, “the fact that a youth theatre company established itself in the first place is a credit to the creativity and tenacity of those young people involved. The fact that they have gone on to bigger and better things is even more remarkable”.

The success of Short Fuse has allowed it to consolidate, gain the confidence of local

families and become involved in providing opportunities for other young people to build their skills and confidence as young writers, performers, spokespeople and producers of art and public commentary. More experienced young people are now taking on roles as mentors and trainers of newcomers, introducing them to the process of cultural production.

An unintended consequence of council’s support for Short Fuse is that young people involved have consistently lent a hand to other community driven projects. For example, members of Short Fuse have made an important contribution to the production of a number of community art murals at local shopping centres and at public and council facilities. This has helped to legitimise the art form and helped provide opportunities for emerging artists.

There is also some good evidence that young people’s involvement in Short Fuse has directly influenced the way council does its work, helping operationalise its aspirations for engaging more with community and promoting the achievements of local people. Young people’s success as community artists has also taught council much about community development and the practice of involving others in council processes. As a council staff member said:

there’s a trend to talk a lot about community engagement but many in council often are unsure about what this means or how to do it. Here young people’s involvement in the arts has taught people around here about the value of using art as a medium for people to come together to work . . . it’s given people a practical lesson in how you can get things done.

The work of Short Fuse has also provided council with a valuable lesson in how



young people and youth culture can be attractive and popular to others. Recently artists from Short Fuse were invited to participate in an exhibition in the heart of the Perth Business District. As another council worker observed:

the public loved their work . . . they were drawn in like flies because they were excited by the vitality and sexiness of youth culture . . . many were especially attracted when they knew we were from Kwinana – a place they thought of as dirty, dangerous and a little depraved.

Others consulted also identified as a major achievement of Short Fuse, its emphasis on challenging the many stereotypes that confront young people growing up in a place like Kwinana and celebrating the area’s strong Indigenous and migrant heritage. As council’s Youth Arts Officer said:

the town, developed in the 1950s to house workers from the newly constructed refinery, has a diverse and rich local culture . . . Short Fuse have managed to capture this in so many ways and help celebrate and commemorate the strength of this tradition.

ChallengesIn the experience of those involved, in

order to attract financial support young people often have to be constituted as in serious crisis. As the Youth Arts Officer said, “to get funding you usually have to paint young people as deviant, on the path to death and destruction and really messed up”. Community art was seen as the tool for fixing young people’s many ills, a recipe for resolving the complex social problems that confront young people. As a consequence there was a risk that if local youth issues or the social troubles of the areas continued

or flared up then community art initiatives would not continue to be supported.

These tensions, faced by many involved in local government youth practice, were ever present and critically felt by members of Short Fuse. At times this frustrated young people, often themselves significant achievers, self-starters and highly motivated. As one person said, “many of the group get fed up with having to make themselves to be losers so that they can get some recognition”.

Members of Short Fuse also struggle with the frustrations experienced by older artists and performers, such as people having little understanding of the costs associated with putting on productions. Many devalue the work of young performers, expecting that they volunteer all their services. Young artists are then regularly exploited and rarely paid commercial rates.

Finally, in the early stages of work on Short Fuse it was important for young people to meet regularly in the council building, working on various projects with the Youth Services Team. As was the case in Darwin, initially gaining access for young people to the council building was difficult for council staff. Some outside of the Youth Services Team were opposed to young people being allowed to enter the building and were slow to acknowledge that young people working on council events had just as much right to be on the premises as any other citizen contributing to community events.

Palmerston Public Library Young Adult Program – Palmerston City Council

The Young Adult Program at the Palmerston Public Library is a small-scale initiative that was driven by council staff’s enthusiasm to encourage literacy and open up young people’s access to libraries. Palmerston is

41Chapter 4Reading and telling their own stories

a satellite city situated 20 kilometres east of Darwin, established in 1981 due to the demand for residential land overtaking supply in the region.

History of the initiativeThe initial idea to establish a library-

based program for young adults came from the Children and Youth Services Coordinator, Palmerston Public Library. In 2000 Palmerston City Council applied for an innovation grant from the Northern Territory Library and Information Service to run a Young Adult Program from the Palmerston Public Library.

The key aim of the program was to encourage young adults to participate in library programs and use the services and facilities available at the Palmerston Public Library for their benefit. Behind this was the goal to “build reading habits and skills that lead to success in school and a lifetime of learning, enjoyment and a motivation for young adults to read more books more often”. A central plank of the project was to enlist the participation of young people in its planning and organisation. The application for funding was successful and the Palmerston Public Library received $15 200 to run a Teen Week project and to prepare a package to act as a step-by-step guide for other councils interested in targeting young adults.

The projectThe program consists of a range of youth

oriented initiatives based at the Palmerston Public Library which attract and encourage the participation of a range of young people aged between thirteen and eighteen years. Young people are involved in the planning, implementation and evaluation of a number of events and initiatives ranging from those that operate on no cost to more substantial ones. The group, supported by the council’s Children and Youth Services Librarian, meets

regularly to plan events, has designed a group logo, undertakes book reviews and advises council on book selection.

One key outcome of the Young Adult Program has been the production of a package designed to assist other councils to undertake similar initiatives. The package comprises a range of materials including sample media releases, logos and a step-by-step guide to planning projects.

The rationale for the project was three-fold. Firstly, young people were identified as a very “high needs group in Palmerston, with youth recreation topping recent social, recreation and cultural needs assessment”. Secondly, the library was identified as a focal point of community life, with young people enjoying “hanging around” in the vicinity of the library. (The local skate park, shopping precinct and main business centre are all in close proximity.) However, there were no library programs specifically targeting young people. Observation from library staff indicated that there was little use of the library by young people for non-school related activity. Finally, library staff argued that youth specific library programs had enjoyed some success internationally (although there was little evidence of this in Australia). It was therefore believed that this initiative provided an opportunity to trial a youth program adapting ideas used in other countries.

The objectives of the Young Adult Program are to:

• build reading habits, literacy skills and an engagement with the library amongst adolescents;

• do this in a way that promotes non- required self-selected reading, writing for pleasure and the idea that libraries are fun and rewarding;

• involve young people in developing strategies and in introducing other


young people to these fun and reward-ing activities;

• use the week (Teen Week) as a focus for promotions and activities which lead to year round and lifetime involvement and enjoyment by young people;

• encourage and support parents and educators in furthering the aims of the week; and

• involve the wider community in provid-ing ongoing support in relation to these aims: a) local schools – promoting and supporting the week to students and parents; b) parent groups – assistance in preparation and implementation of events and activities; and c) YMCA or local youth groups – promotion and encouraging young people for long-term involvement in further projects.

Initially library staff began the program with a week of planned events, tagged “Teen Week”. This was preceded by an initial consultation with groups of young people which resulted in the design of a preliminary program and ideas for other activities that could be added by young people who decided to get involved. It also resulted in the forming of a small reference group made up of council staff, a youth worker, a parent, an educator and young people.

The success of the week was consolidated by planning post-week activities and forming the Young Adult Program group. This group has continued to meet regularly and plan a series of events. On average the Young Adult Program group holds one event per month, and the following includes some of the key events organised over the past three years:

• a Northern Territory Youth Affairs play-wright workshop;

• a concert and launch of the Young Adult Program;

• digital and dance workshops;

• production and show-case of “A Silent Movie”;

• Internet skills training workshops;

• a Literature for Young Adults workshop;

• a calligraphy workshop;

• bedtime stories for children from 0–5 years;

• a web site design workshop;

• a “Read-a-thon” to raise money for a non-profit animal care group;

• the production of a promotional video which won an Encouragement Award at the Downunder Film Festival;

• painting poles in the library;

• information and career nights;

• production of a float for the Palmerston Festival;

• production of a library guide; and

• a Young Librarian Volunteers program.

Stakeholder involvementA range of groups identified as strategic

partners supports various events held by the Young Adult Program group. Initially Triple J Radio gave “Teen Week” strong media coverage airing a series of vignettes by young people from the Northern Territory. Local youth organisations, such as Corrugated Iron Youth Arts and the YMCA assist with events management, promotion and running skills workshops.

Groups affiliated with the library also consistently work with the group. For example, the council’s Local History Project has worked with young people to prepare a display for the council’s Local History Collection. Local schools promote events and encourage students to participate. In addition, local parents regularly offer some assistance and practical support.

43

The Young Adult Program group has attracted funds from a diverse range of agencies. Apart from the initial Innovation Grant from the Northern Territory Library and Information Service, small grants have been received from the Northern Territory Youth Grants Program and the Community Services section of Palmerston City Council. Since 2001 Palmerston City Council has provided $2 000 a year to assist the Young Adult Program group with its activities. In addition, the group has managed to attract financial and in-kind support from a number of local businesses for specific projects. For example Cash Converters provided $1 000 for a workshop on web site training. Baker’s Delight provides food for YAG meetings. A local cinema provides complementary tickets as prizes for group events.

Participation The establishment of the Young Adult

Program was based on the premise that it is important to encourage young people’s access to and active involvement in public libraries. This involvement has been supported by council’s Children and Youth Service’s Librarian, and young members of the group play an active part in arranging activities such as information evenings, fundraising and reading events. In addition, some of those involved have undertaken a training program and carried out work as library volunteers.

According to council staff, young people’s involvement has waxed and waned over the three years of the project. Partly this reflects other demands placed on young people, such as study commitments and part-time work, but also the mobility of some young people from defence services families and other transient groups.

However, the core group has changed little over time so that many young people have

had a long-term involvement with the group and library activities. As a consequence they have become quite a tight knit group, working with considerable cohesion. While this has obvious advantages it has also proved something of a hurdle when council staff have attempted to attract new groups of young people, who tend to see the established core group as “owning” the program.

AchievementsThose closely associated with the Young

Adult Program count among its achievements the group’s sustained existence and the fact that a small but consistent group of young people is using the public library and its resources. In addition, young people are regularly involved in planning and carrying out information, entertainment, promotional and participatory events for themselves and others of their age. Other important achievements have been the involvement of young people in building a more extensive and relevant young adult collection, the painting of artwork in sections of the library, the production of a library “youth” promotional video and young people’s involvement in the staffing of the library.

One unintended consequence of the Young Adult Program has been the involvement of a core group of young people in additional roles with council. For example, a number of young people have become members of the council’s Youth Advisory Group, represented council at Youth Leadership conferences and acted as facilitators of the council’s annual “Talk-Out-Loud” youth consultation.

There appear to be a number reasons for the success of the Young Adult Program. According to council staff the informal style adopted by the group is critical to its attraction to young people. Much emphasis is placed on the idea that “relationship



building is what’s most important to adolescents”. Therefore considerable time is allocated during events and meetings to “letting friendships develop” and “giving kids time to just talk with each other”. Likewise the philosophy consistently adopted by library staff is to “ask, don’t tell” young people in relation to the group’s direction. Importance was also attached to finding ways to “make it fun”. In the view of council staff, one of the principal reasons why so few young people use public libraries is that they usually associate them with boredom, dullness and a lack of pleasure. Stereotypically young people see a librarian as an older person who sees it as their job to maintain a quiet and sterile environment free from any kind of vibrancy and fun. In contrast, those young people involved claim that the Children and Youth Services Librarian is important in this regard. Her informal style combined with emphasis on giving young people a place to have fun and build relationships was seen as a critical ingredient in keeping young people interested and prepared to use the library.

Offering young people opportunities to take on roles in the library and having them get involved in building a young adult collection were also cited as a reason behind the success of the program. Indeed, it is now the convention that the Young Adult Program group takes responsibility for the purchasing of books, magazines and CDs for the young adult collection. Another important initiative has been to offer members of the group casual work after they have progressed through a training course.

Finally, young people’s comfort with being in the space was articulated as very important. Council staff had agreed to target young people who used the library to make them “feel warm and welcome”. They had offered young people the chance to create

a youth specific space and instituted a number of activities to allow young people to own this space (such as redesigning and painting the area).

ChallengesMany of the challenges identified by those

involved relate to the problem of maintaining a solid core group of young people. Continuing their ongoing involvement proved to be most difficult for those young people who were in their senior years of schooling. Not surprisingly, at the very moment when young people grew in their confidence and became important leaders in group activities, their study commitments grew and the time available for group events became limited. In recent times library staff have instituted a program to encourage those with a longer-term involvement in the group to adopt a younger person in an attempt to bring new members into the group and encourage their leadership.

Young people’s lack of confidence also presented a challenge at times. Various events had been organised but became difficult to carry out when young people realised that it would be necessary to take on a public role. For example, a “Bedtime Story” event was initially designed so that young people could read to children 0–5 years. This was well attended by children, parents and some young people. However, it became necessary for library staff to take on the work of reading as young people “froze” and found it too difficult to read with so much public attention. Subsequently, smaller scale reading activities were arranged so that young people could take up similar opportunities on the spur of the moment and with a more intimate audience.

The traditional image of a public library as a quiet place of reading and reflection

45

was also identified as a constant hurdle for the group. According to library staff, the standard emphasis on governing noise in public libraries ran counter to young people’s need for a public space that is available to combine reading with opportunities to meet, talk and have fun. To deal with this challenge the group made arrangements to use less conspicuous spaces in the library, arrange some use of areas outside the library and arrange events outside public opening hours. Increasingly public libraries are being designed to include space that allows groups, such as young people, to discuss and carry out activities without disturbing others. One such area is being planned for the Palmerston Public Library.

Another challenge facing the group reflects the stigma many young people have attached to reading and using libraries. As a staff member said, “young people, in particular boys, see reading and using public libraries as a ‘nerdy’ thing . . . this makes it difficult to attract them”. In many ways this initiative represents one attempt to counter the trend away from libraries and reading during adolescence. In addition, the group identified a number of key strategies for promoting the idea of the public library as a “cool” place. These included: building the library’s CD collection to include contemporary music attractive to young people; targeting the subscription of youth magazines; painting sections of the library; and increasing the visibility of youth events through promotion.

The group had no Indigenous young people involved. This partly reflects the low levels of Indigenous use of public libraries generally. Although young people had themselves identified this as a problem the group had little idea about how they might address this apart from suggesting that the young adult collection might take on an Indigenous focus.

ConclusionThese case studies demonstrate how

projects which allow young people to express their identities creatively can be powerful mechanisms for participation. Starting such projects can be daunting, as they require considerable commitment and support from local government to keep them going. However, writing positive narratives about young people, acting out stories which reveal the complexities of young people’s lives, and creating a culture of reading as “cool” for young people highlight the diversity of young people’s interests and aspirations. Each project, in its own way, has provided inclusive, active opportunities for young people to interact with each other and to promote the contribution young people make to society generally. The case studies illustrate the importance of trialling ambitious projects (the newspaper), of promoting creative opportunities (the theatre group), and taking a chance on seemingly unlikely activities (the reading group) if the ingredients for a successful experiment are present.


5Places and spaces for young people

IntroductionThis chapter presents two case studies

which illustrate the difficult issue of the use of public places and spaces by young people. Youth work developed in Australia, at least in part, to deal with public fears about young people’s visibility on city streets and many communities, and local governments, struggle to balance these fears about safety and order with the rights of young people to enjoy public domains.

Each of the projects described here started because of community perceptions that young people presented a risk to community safety through their behaviour in public places. The attempted solutions are different, however. The Palmerston Public Spaces Protocol has been informed by a growing trend in the development of protocols, which attempt to negotiate agreements on the sharing of public space. The aim of this project is to prevent or reduce anti-social behaviour by

young people. The Longford Police Caution Project takes a more individual and reactive approach, by instituting an informal police caution for those young people apprehended for an offence. Both projects raise important questions about how local governments protect the rights of young people to access public spaces while satisfying concerns about community safety. Both projects also illustrate the broader role that many local governments are taking in terms of community consultation and policy formation in order to address community issues.

Public Spaces Protocol – Palmerston City Council

Palmerston is a very young but fast growing city 20 kilometres east of Darwin, the capital of the Northern Territory. The Palmerston Public Spaces Protocol is a community consultation and negotiation project that culminated in a multiple locations agreement being developed


with the support of young people, local businesses, community service providers, the police, schools, government departments and the local government. All of the areas covered in the protocol are situated within Palmerston’s Central Business District. The initiative has been supported and managed by the Palmerston City Council, Community Services Department.

History of the initiativePrior to 2001 council examined the

possibility of bringing together a range of community and industry groups to respond to what it and others saw as social tensions developing between users of several different locations in the Palmerston Central Business District.

Local business, youth workers, security firms, police and the media had identified problems with the way some young people were using various “hot spots” in the Central Business District. Public safety issues had been identified as a problem with groups of young people being responsible for harassing people, throwing stones at passers by, breaking into and damaging shopping centres. A range of responses to these problems had already been tried. These included using night patrols, issuing trespass notices, changing the physical design and layout of some of the spaces and targeting of specific areas by the police and security. Apparently the perception existed amongst a range of local people that previous attempts to deal with youth problems enjoyed only partial success. As one of those consulted said, “the things we tried were catch-up strategies”.

Similar tensions were reported to have existed for many years in other locations throughout Australia. One response to these tensions has been the growth in popularity

of public spaces protocols or agreements. Indeed it has been claimed that “Public Space Practice”, a term used to describe this approach, has enjoyed some success with key people in these locations. These people have experienced both “relief from those tensions and a range of social and financial benefits from their involvement in the process” (Draft Palmerston Central Business District Public Spaces Protocol).

In the background discussion to the Palmerston protocol the authors describe Public Space Practice as:

the art of generating a “whole of community” approach to addressing the tensions and barriers that affect how community members feel about accessing and investing in public places. Getting people with different views, opinions and experiences to communicate with each other; to debate and argue through issues; to identify strategies that most parties can live with; and to agree at some point on giving some of those strategies a chance, places most communities in a far stronger position to address the very tensions that have the potential to destroy them.

In 2001 a consultant identified a number of public spaces of concern in the Central Business District. These included the bus interchange, the two major shopping centres, the open space in the city centre, the skate park, the Ampol service station, the YMCA Drop-In Centre and a central green space named Goyder Hill. The consultant advised that these “hotspots” would benefit from the development of a public spaces protocol.

Council applied and received funds from the Northern Territory Office of Crime Prevention to undertake the development of a Palmerston Central Business District Protocol and a project worker was engaged

49

by council to commence stakeholder consultations and the development of a draft protocol. In July 2002, another interstate public space and planning expert met with local community representatives, toured the Central Business District and suggested a range of planning and design initiatives that could assist in alleviating local tensions.

The projectThis initiative consists of a process of

negotiations between stakeholders that aim to agree on a protocol for the use, management and design of public space in the Palmerston Central Business District focusing on both behavioural and design/facility/amenity issues. The process includes the development of grievance procedures for five key locations around the Palmerston Central Business District.

The project’s intention is to “develop a city centre which feels friendly and welcoming, is safe for all users, provides a sense of vibrancy and energy, provides ready and safe access to all facilities, and reflects the diversity of the city’s numerous residents”. Another motivation for the young city is “the need to promote a community that is firmly focused on developing strong social foundations”.

The project has been guided by the desire to: promote inclusivity in relation to young people and public space, and to address tensions between young people and others in relation to public space issues. In addition, those involved in driving the project believe it important to address public space problems by considering:

• design and planning;

• the provision and availability of com-munity services;

• styles of management;

• the availability of on-site facilities and amenities;

• opportunities for the development of events and activities; and

• behaviour management and practices.

Finally, project staff articulate the importance of “a strongly pro-youth advocacy perspective”. According to the draft protocol, the philosophy underpinning the approach is that “community members have rights and responsibilities in relation to their ability to access and use public space. Young people are members of the community and as such they should enjoy the same rights and responsibilities”.

Initially the desire to develop a protocol was prompted by the popular belief that young people were the key source of public space problems. In the early days of the initiative it appears there was strong support for a youth-oriented focus. However it became apparent that young people were only one of the groups needing attention. People also regularly raised as significant, the needs and issues of itinerant and Indigenous people’s use of public space. Other people also expressed general concerns about pedestrian safety and access throughout the Central Business District and conflicts between pedestrian and vehicular traffic. This prompted a subtle shift towards the development of public space protocols that could cater to the interests of a broad range of groups, not specifically young people. However, young people do remain a central focus of the initiative. As one person involved said, “when most people are thinking and talking about the issues they still tend to focus more on youth as the key problem group”.

The development of the protocol has included formal discussions between stakeholders, the carrying out of community

Chapter 5Places and spaces for young people


workshops, one-to-one interviews with a range of people using the areas and on-site visits and observations. More than 300 individuals and representatives from key organisations participated during the development stages of the protocol. This included students, a broad range of young people, including those who regularly frequent the areas, representatives from a number of government departments responsible for managing some of the sites, police, security firms, the Palmerston youth services sector and a range of local business owners and managers. Throughout this process people were asked to:

• explore their perceptions about other people in their community; what moti-vates and inspires them, what they are missing in their community and would like to see developed;

• consider how different groups of people communicate with each other; what makes people feel like they are welcome, that they belong, that they are safe; or conversely, what pushes them away or makes them feel un- wanted, unsafe, resentful;

• consider the physical structures that make up the Central Business District, gaps in facilities and the developments that could help different spaces become more attractive, relate more effectively and enable safer access from one place to another;

• consider the process of managing different public spaces in the Central Business District, how guidelines should be “laid down” and the manner in which rules are enforced when it is necessary to do so; and

• explore the potential benefits of work-ing with other community members to improve how public space is accessed

and used, rather than solely imposing regulatory measures to deal with com-munity tensions.

Throughout these discussions people were asked to recognise that the protocol is not designed to deal with criminal behaviours or council by-laws or the procedures that regulate these laws as these are defined elsewhere. Rather, discussions took place which could help participants clarify what they considered as anti-social or rule-breaking behaviour that could be addressed or managed through processes outlined within the protocol.

To help construct an Implementation Plan for each location participants were asked to consider the proposed initiatives within a short (1-year), medium (1–3-years) and long-term (up to 5-years) timeframe. The individual projects and the proposed timeframes for their implementation were then checked by each stakeholder and, if acceptable to the entire group, they were then included in the final document.

Core stakeholders are expected to show their support of the protocol and the proposed implementation plan by becoming signatories to the protocol document. Stakeholders sign only the protocol docu-ment for the sites they worked on. At the time of this research (July 2003) a final draft of the protocols for the five sites had been publicly launched. It was envisaged that the protocol and the grievance procedures for each of the sites would be evaluated over the following six months and that agreements would be signed off by December 2003.

ParticipationWhen asked about young people’s

participation in the project, informants talked about this as an initiative driven by the need to include young people, especially those excluded from formal decision-making

51Chapter 5Places and spaces for young people

structures, as one of the most important stakeholders. This presented them with very difficult challenges. Initially young people who used the various five areas were invited to attend formal stakeholder meetings. Not many attended. According to one of the council staff, those who frequent public spaces and are the target of official attention often feel threatened in formal meetings or have little skill and confidence in being able to represent their own interests. In addition, public meetings can sometimes be forums where animosity and disrespect is expressed towards young people. Not surprisingly, they have little confidence in attending such events.

The project team then decided that it would approach the challenge of involving young people in a number of ways. Members of the team began by making a concerted effort to contact young people who use the various areas in the Palmerston Central Business District. They also enlisted the support of workers and other adults who already had relationships with these young people, asking them to encourage young people to attend future meetings and/or have discussions with the adult about their interests and issues. In the early stages of the project the Palmerston Youth Council was still meeting regularly. The project officer of the protocol initiative met with the Youth Council, discussing the plans to come up with an agreement, asking for young people’s comments and inviting members of Youth Council to participate in future discussions. The project officer also attended the council’s annual youth consultation event, “Talk Out Loud” as a guest speaker. For two out of the last three “Talk Out Louds” the issue of young people’s access to public space has been a major matter of discussion and a series of recommendations have been produced from the fora.

Informal mechanisms for involving young people in discussions were also used. This meant valuing the development of relationships between young people and key adults such as youth workers, a local pastor, the police, teachers and others who were trusted by young people. Critical in this process was the involvement of younger workers and those who, due to their previous work roles, had already spent considerable time with young people.

According to council’s Youth Services Coordinator it was also important that any disrespectful, patronising or judgemental behaviours of adults were moderated in public meetings. In her view it was important when this occurred that other adults in key social positions act to mediate any prejudice and demonstrate considerable respect for the ideas and interests of young people present.

A number of other practical principles that should shape youth participation were identified. These included seeing concrete results in a timely fashion; arranging meetings that were convenient and in accessible places; and having continuity in contact, allowing young people to build trust and confidence with adults. The development of the Implementation Plan in consultation with all stakeholders, particularly young people, was a valuable mechanism for establishing realistic expectations among participants.

AchievementsIt is too early in the development of the

initiative to make definitive judgements about its achievements. However, the successful development of a draft set of protocols was cited as the project’s major achievement. As one person said, “to actually produce a protocol that includes different applications to solve different problems is a success in


itself”. Likewise, “to get so many different groups to work on something like this is no mean feat . . . to succeed in doing it across five separate areas is quite something”.

There is some evidence that this achievement had unintended consequences outside of the project. For example, one manager of a youth organisation claimed that he had met and established helpful relationships with a number of local business people and the police as a consequence of participating in consultations. This had allowed him to call upon these people for assistance in relation to other issues. “What it has meant”, he said, “is that you get to see who is helpful in one setting so you can confidently contact them about stuff in another setting”.

Another strength of the process was that it encouraged people to turn their minds to the depth and complexity of problems and the range of solutions that could be sought. Bringing together diverse sets of people with wide ranging expertise both conveyed to people how difficult it can be to find solutions and encouraged people to “think laterally and come up with a wide range of solutions”.

One consequence appears to have been that people involved were less likely to consider young people as singularly responsible for public space problems and more likely to see management of public space as a “community responsibility”. Emphasis has now shifted some way from young people as the target of the protocols towards the idea that young people are one key stakeholder group.

The continual disappointment with attempts to manage the behaviour of people in public areas prompted a preparedness to try new ways of dealing with problems in public space. In other words, the consistent frustrations and concerns of the key groups involved in the formation of the protocols and media coverage of the issue appears to

have motivated people to consider such a novel approach.

Finally, the commitment of council (particularly the mayor) and council officers was seen as a major contributor to the project’s success so far. The fact that the process was seen to be led by council and that a key party was prepared to administer the project, maintain its momentum and act as a mediator between conflicting groups was clearly important.

ChallengesThere are a number of challenges facing

the initiative in the immediate future. The first is maintaining relevant and consistent representation and involvement by young people. According to one informant, Palmerston City Council has had mixed success in maintaining youth participatory processes. While it did commit significant resources to the formation of a Youth Advisory Group (2000–2002) and a Youth Council (2002–2003) this was disbanded in 2003 because of a lack of involvement by young people.

Connected with this challenge is that the language of the draft protocol is difficult and cumbersome, both for a youth audience and for business groups and others not familiar with what one person called “youth affairs speak”. The draft document is 83 pages long and is text intensive. Making the sentiments of the protocols relevant to the range of stakeholders might be achieved through the production of executive summaries for business people and one-page documents produced by young people for a youth audience.

The final challenge is to maintain momentum created in the absence of two key workers on the project. It is envisaged that the protocols will be signed by December.

53

It is possible that during this time lapse the issue will cease to be as important and there may need to be work undertaken to reinvigorate the project. Indeed, as one key person said “it seems that the issue is off the boil at the moment”.

The Longford Police Caution Project – Northern Midlands Municipal Council, Tasmania

The Longford Police Caution Project in the Northern Midlands Council of Tasmania is a police intervention program based in Longford. The Northern Midlands Council covers an area of 5 130 sq kms, and is one of the largest and most diverse municipal areas in Tasmania. It is home to nearly 12 000 people, 55 per cent of whom live in the clustered towns of Longford, Perth, and Evandale, twenty minutes from Launceston. Longford is the hub of the LGA, the largest town, and home to the council chambers. The LGA is economically based in farming and agriculture, has one of the largest meat works in the state, and a thriving and growing tourism industry.

The Caution project attempts to prevent a cycle of offending by young people when they first come into contact with the police, by a collaborative intervention between police and a council youth development officer. The intervention addresses the immediate offence, but also the wider social context of the young person, their family and the community.

History of the initiativeIn late 2001 in Longford, a small and

picturesque town, there was a belief in the community that the streets were no longer safe for its more elderly residents, and that young people were out of control. The matter culminated in the burning of

one of the town’s historic hedgerows close to a house, and many people thought things had gone too far. Councillors were apparently appalled at the perceptions abroad of their town, and of the fear among large parts of the community. They were determined to act to improve both the perception and the reality.

A public meeting was called, out of which grew a Special Committee of Council, the Longford Community Safety Committee. This included representatives of the regional police, councillors and council staff, the Baptist church, “elderly residents”, local business people, a young person, and others. The committee was tasked with creating a Safety Plan which was presented to council in March 2002. Part of this plan called for the employment of a Youth Development Officer “to work on issues across the Northern Midlands and to serve as a catalyst for the development of networks between organisations working with youth in our community”. There would also be the trial of “a scheme to enable local youth on Community Service Orders and the Diversional Conferencing Program to undertake their community service work in their local community” (Northern Midlands 2002, p. 6).

The council had not previously employed a youth worker of this type – the only previous employee had been a Youth Recreation Officer. What was needed now, it was believed, was a more “hard core” youth approach because of the strong involvement with “at-risk” youth. The new Youth Development Officer (YDO) was duly employed in June 2002, with the LGA providing half of his salary and matched funds from the state government. The YDO was hired in the first instance for 12 months, but the position has since been extended until the end of June 2004.



The projectThe Tasmanian legal system allows

for informal police cautions – in effect being “told off” – and then court-based community service orders of one type or another. The Police Caution Project aims to insert another level of action, where there is official community service activity, but no court intervention, and therefore no official record. The project is reactive rather than preventative in that nothing happens until an offence has occurred. So far it has largely dealt with young people aged 10–18 years.

Once a young person has been apprehended for an offence which could be taken before the courts, they are considered for the project. After apprehension, the young person, a parent or guardian, the Sergeant and the YDO all meet to discuss the issue. If the young person admits to the offence, admits that it was wrong to have committed it, and is willing to take part in the program, they are considered for inclusion. They are told that there will be an amount of restitutional community work to be carried out, and that the YDO will oversee this.

At this stage the Sergeant and the YDO discuss the number of hours of community work appropriate. In practice this seems to never exceed 10 hours community work. Having agreed upon the level of penalty, the young person is brought before the Sergeant who asks the young person to name the appropriate penalty (having intimated that it is generally less than ten hours). The Sergeant claimed that taking part in the negotiation of the penalty gave a sense of ownership to the young people involved, and that they tended to select higher penalties than were finally imposed. Once the penalty has been agreed a formal contract is entered into and signed by the Sergeant, the young person

and a parent/guardian. The young person is made aware that failure to comply with the contract will result in the matter going into the court system. An important part of the contract and the project is that the young person’s community work is to be overseen by the YDO.

It is this desire to divert people from the court system, and to keep them away from it, that is behind much of the YDO’s work in this area. The police are the first point of contact and the Sergeant decides whether a young person is offered the program or stays in the court system. According to the Sergeant, involvement in the program is based on “knowing” the young person in question. Some are not suited to such interventions and can only be dealt with by the normal courts, he said. The YDO spoke of serious violence issues, and personal problems as things that might rule an individual out of the program. Both men spoke of the need to match the right people to the program.

The nature of young people’s anti-social activities in the area range from vandalism (perceived as the greatest “problem”), along with shoplifting, to violence and general anti-social activities. For the Sergeant, the sorts of activity encountered are things that young people have always done, and pointed out that some members of the community tended to forget what might have occurred in their own youth.

The YDO and the Sergeant both stated that the “ownership” of the penalty is an important part of the success of the program. Rather than punishment, the YDO claimed that the involvement of the young people in the process means that the community work is seen in terms of atonement.

A final important aspect of the program is that it is generally anonymous. Although the people in the program are obviously

55

known to the Sergeant and the YDO, their community service is not differentiated from other community activities. Much of what is done is articulated with other community and volunteer efforts. The YDO and the Sergeant both stated that making the community service stand out in the community would be counter-productive; shaming individuals was not the point of the exercise.

Working with young peopleThe work involved in the Police Caution

program is part of the YDO’s general approach to working within the community. He was hired to do “hard core” youth work, and believes in work that “is really going to make a difference”. He describes his approach as working with the long-term in mind, and says that he tends “to take things pretty slowly”. The strength of the Police Caution program was that it gave him chances to deal with people in their family and other situations. Much of the behaviour that resulted in young people coming into contact with the program had its roots in other matters, he believed. Once he had contact with the young person, it was possible for the YDO to start to help the individual deal with any other issues that might be affecting them – family matters, other personal needs, for example – and help link the individuals with other services that might assist them. In particular, he identified assistance with housing and work matters as one part of the work that began with the Police Caution program.

The YDO also talked about the right of young people to be informed to the same level as anyone else in the community. A parent of one young person who had been through the program supported this view, stating a number of times that one of the most important aspects of the YDO’s dealings with their child was that he did not “talk down to them” – he explained what

was going on and why it was important. The young person involved also thought this was a strength of the program. They said that the YDO was a common visitor to their school, where he spoke generally with young people, but that the particular young person’s involvement in the Police Caution program was not generally known.

The young person talked about being glad that when they did their community service work, the other people involved did not know it was ordered community service – it took place at an event that involved volunteers. Since their work for the program, the YDO had involved the young person in other voluntary activities, and was keeping an interested eye on their progress at school. This had more to do with helping the young person find an agreeable pathway through school, than “keeping tabs” on them. The parent thought that this was a strong point in the program, that the YDO did not “dump” the young people after the official part of the program had concluded, but also that there was no sense that they were being hounded in any way. Importantly, the young person described the way the police had dealt with the problem as “awesome”.

A wide range of cases and families are dealt with through the Police Caution program. Some, like the one discussed above, seem simpler than others. The YDO stated that all sorts of families had been represented in the program, and that some had led to intense and long-term interactions. One case involved a young person who had been helped to find a job, but who had subsequently lost that position, and had become semi-homeless and out of touch with their family. The YDO was now working with the siblings of that particular young person, and had regained some contact with the original young person and was again helping them towards work and housing



solutions. Part of the reconnection between the YDO and the young person had occurred because of the contacts within the younger community that had been built up through the Police Caution program.

The YDO is also involved in facilitating two youth support networks in the LGA; leading the LGAs YAC (known as the Youth Task Force, which arose from the Safety Plan); assisting in an after-school activity program in Campbell Town (in the central region of the LGA); facilitating school holiday programs in consultation with young people; and organising various activities and events. The council was one of the first to have a dedicated youth policy, and currently has a partnership with the state government for a youth leadership promotion schedule. Last year two youth leaders were sponsored to the Local Government Forum and one of these two was also assisted to gain a position as “Youth Grant Maker” with the Foundation for Young Australians.

AchievementsThe measurable results of the program

have been positive in the year it has been running. There has been a 15–20 per cent drop in the number of reported accounts of vandalism since the program began, for instance. The Sergeant did not claim that this was due entirely to the program, stating instead that youth crime was cyclical, but the figures were encouraging, he said. Also, crime statistics were probably the most important evaluation tool for the police at divisional level, and important for the continued existence of the program. The other major measurement concerns recidivism – since the program began, no one entering the program has re-offended. The Sergeant and the YDO both know that this must happen some time, but for the present they can point to some success.

The approach also seems to have had a positive effect in other areas. Bus shelters used to be regularly vandalised, and repainting them with the addition of colourful murals has been used as a community service. Since their repainting, the shelters have not been vandalised again.

While both the YDO and the Sergeant considered the Caution program important in itself, it has wider value. From the Sergeant’s perspective, it provided him with another option when dealing with young people rather than just saying, “don’t do it again”. He stated that the program had assisted him “greatly” in his general policing efforts – and with over 30 years experience, much of it in rural communities, his assessment carries some weight. He thought the interaction with the YDO was vital, and offered the young people services he could not. Their pooled knowledge of the situations facing young individuals was enhanced and better decisions possible for young people. The two certainly exhibited a close and collegial working style, and a sense that they were working in the same direction.

The YDO has a somewhat different view. He was interested in the way the program gave him better access to the general community, and the chances it offered him to provide deeper and more meaningful assistance to young people and their families. As a newcomer to the region, both personally and professionally, he saw the program as a useful tool that helped him engage with the community and with specific young people, to help them address their behaviour.

ChallengesA major obstacle to the continued success

of this project is its uncertain funding. The LGA is fiscally conservative, and concerned that the state government shares the

57

burden of dealing with the perceived youth “problem”. If state funding was to lapse after June 2004, the manager was doubtful that the YDO position would be continued as a full-time position.

Another possible hurdle to the continuation of the program lies in the method of its evaluation. Official police evaluation of such programs is heavily based on crime statistics. At the time of our field visit the figures appeared to support the view that the program was leading to reduced crime by young people. However, the Sergeant stated that normal aging processes have, at least in part, led to the decline in vandalism and the associated activities and that a natural resurgence in these activities might dampen official enthusiasm for the program. Also, the program runs, in the Sergeant’s words, a “little bit outside department protocols”, with the implication that it might lose support if the figures fail.

Similarly, council support depends upon demonstration of the program’s continuing success. In part this may require the YDO to show the links between the Police Caution Project and the wide ranging prevention work undertaken in the community. This raises the more complex question of the way in which such community development activities are measured.

One last challenge to the success of the program rests in one of its strengths: the efforts of and relationship between the Sergeant and the YDO. Both men are eager to keep the program working well. The Sergeant is concerned that they keep looking for ways to improve the scheme. The YDO is very focused upon helping individuals and their families, and with creating better links between people within the broader community. Both are very supportive of the other. If either were to be replaced by someone with less interest in the program and commitment to its processes, it could falter. Given the frequent mobility of workers, this is a real possibility.

ConclusionBoth these case studies demonstrate the

broad role that local government is taking with respect to young people, well outside conventional youth services. The projects also deal with a central youth issue – the balance between the rights of young people to access public places and spaces open to other citizens, and the fears about community safety their behaviour sometimes cause among older people. The projects illustrate the point that there is more than one way to approach this issue, but that acceptance by young people will depend upon their inclusion in the decision-making processes.


IntroductionMany local governments around Australia

have become frontline providers of youth services, both because other levels of government have withdrawn from this arena, and because of pressure from communities that LGAs “do something” about the problems of young people. These case studies demonstrate how skilled local government workers are using their knowledge of youth service models and young people to create services which better address their needs. The move away from centre-based services to mobile outreach which can access young people in their own localities has become an important component of local government youth services provision. In some cases, such as Dorset, youth services are being developed with the direct input of council youth advisory groups, showing how youth governance structures can connect to youth services in a meaningful way. In other cases, such as Hornsby, research on the needs of

young people is providing evidence-based youth practice.

FEWCHA and KAMELEON: the Dorset Municipal Council Youth Advisory Group and Mobile Youth Health Outreach

FEWCHA is the Dorset Youth Advisory Group and a special committee of the Dorset Municipal Council. The program is based on ideas of meaningful participation, broad definitions of health, and outreach practices. One of FEWCHA’s major projects is the KAMELEON – the mobile youth health outreach van. Dorset Council is a small, dispersed council situated in the north-east of Tasmania. It has a population of 7 400 spread over twelve small towns. Scottsdale (1 922 people) is the largest town, houses the council offices, and is located centrally in the LGA. Bridport, on the northern coast, is home to 1 234 people. The other towns and hamlets range from small to the extremely

6Flexible services through mobile outreach


small. Agriculture and forestry are the main industries, although tourism and some light industry also exist. Physically, the area runs from the beaches of Bass Strait to rolling farmland to mountainous rainforest. Four towns have primary schools, while Winnaleah has a district high school and Scottsdale a high school. Both Winnaleah and Scottsdale run Year 11 and 12 vocational education and training courses.

History of the initiativeIn 1998, the Tasmanian Government,

through the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and the Department of Education, conducted the North East Tasmania Health Needs Study. Local communities were interviewed and among many concerns raised, young people declared the need for “‘youth specific, parent free’, meeting spaces in their towns” (DHHS 1998, p. 40). The current Youth Health Officer noted that the main problems in the area for young people revolved around isolation: there was nothing to do, nowhere to go, and young people were bored. The Health Needs Study alerted council and the community to the needs of young people, in particular, issues to do with health and participation.

After the study, Dorset applied to the Federal Government for Regional Health Services Grants and received $800 000 over three years to implement new regional health strategies. The plan involved acquiring a Youth Health Officer, a Primary Health Care Coordinator, and a Mental Health Worker. The council assumed responsibility for the Youth Health Officer (YHO) position, while the other health positions were outsourced to the state government.

The appointment of a new Community Development Services Manager with a

background in youth services, led to the creation of a youth group in the district. Until this time there had not been a dedicated youth service worker in the council. In 2001 the manager garnered $1 500 targeted Youth Week funds from the Office of Youth Affairs (OYA) for a large “youth bash” in one of the medium-sized regional towns, with local and visiting Tasmanian bands, and some sporting activities. The funds were spent largely on transport, so that young people from around the LGA could attend. During the event, surveys were circulated to young people, asking what they thought were the major youth concerns in the area, and whether they might be interested in forming a youth group. Thirty people said that they wanted to be involved.

“Overwhelmed” by the response the manager set about finding ways to implement the suggestions. She sought and received more funding from the Office of Youth Affairs to conduct strategic planning meetings and meeting/procedure workshops for local young people, also involving the police and a youth worker from Launceston. A two-day workshop ensued, with a large number of young people participating. According to the manager, it was a pleasant experience, but a lot of work. The young people planned the next twelve months, and formed a young people’s group. They decided on election procedures for office-bearers, and how meetings would be run. An eleven-year-old was elected the first president, “which was pretty cool” in the manager’s opinion.

Around this time, a government department was desperate to offload a number of old ex-dental caravans. The new group was told of the offer, and decided a caravan would be useful; the manager was less certain but agreed, and the KAMELEON van was born. Three weeks after the formation of the group, an operational plan was presented

61

to council and the group became an official reporting committee to Dorset Council. It then chose its name – they were now officially FEWCHA. The President of FEWCHA was on the selection panel that subsequently chose the Youth Health Officer.

FEWCHA structureFEWCHA membership is open to anyone

who wants to join, and the group is made up of young people in Years 6–10 (from the last year of primary school through to the last compulsory year of high school). The latter school years were omitted because there is no academic education for Years 11 and 12 in the LGA (although there is some VET at two schools). However, according to the YHO no one is excluded from the group, although they leave for Launceston to study, or for other reasons. Most of these young people appear to maintain their connectedness to the group and join holiday programs run by FEWCHA when they are around.

At the time of interviews, there were about 16 active members of FEWCHA, and the group meets once or twice a month on average. Meetings are held at various locations across the LGA, with the Youth Health Officer picking up young people from various towns and dropping them home after the meeting. They also meet at the council chambers. Both FEWCHA members and the YHO described the meetings as “laid back” affairs. Members raise what they want to discuss and projects and events are discussed and planned, with input from the YHO.

FEWCHA and the KAMELEON FEWCHA selects the way they want to work

and the projects they want to take on. One of the first projects involved the conversion of the ex-dental van into the KAMELEON. This was designed to be attractive to young

people and provide entertainment, activities and subtle health promotion. Much of the conversion relied on outside funding – over $1 600 was received from the Regional Arts Fund Tasmania to pay a young “graffiti” artist to oversee its decoration. Local young people were involved in the design and painting of the van, and the two-day exercise received coverage in the local press.

More financial support came from the DHHS, Innovative Services for Homeless Youth, and The Centenary of Foundation. These funds allowed the KAMELEON to be fitted with Playstation 2 consoles, television and VCR, computer facilities, as well as music equipment, board games, comfortable furniture (mainly beanbags), sports gear and other sundry equipment. Also available in the van are health information, sexual health information and condoms, and the YHO. The KAMELEON was launched at a Youth Bash in April 2002. Later funds have allowed for a similarly decorated annex to be created.

The YHO sees the KAMELEON as a point of contact for young people with health and other council services. She sees the equipment in the van as “a tool to build relationships” with young people. Making the young people comfortable, and giving them what they want increases the chances of getting them to “tell their stories”. The KAMELEON started as a general outreach tool – travelling to different parts of the LGA, appearing at public events.

When interviewed, ten members of FEWCHA all spoke highly of the KAMELEON. It gained “two thumbs up” from the group, some of whom described it as “great”. One downside was the size of the van: it was too small, and a bigger van would be better. Another more general problem noted by the group was that one van was not enough

Chapter 6Flexible services through mobile outreach


service provision for the LGA (a point taken up below).

Small though it might be, KAMELEON has attracted wider attention and has become a sought-after part of public activity in the LGA. When people are planning a public event, they ask council if the KAMELEON can be present as a special place for young people. In November 2002 the KAMELEON won the Heart Foundation Kellogs Local Government Award for the best rural and remote community project. The project has also been declared Tasmania’s best rural and remote project and the state’s best overall project.

The YHO takes pride in these achievements, but is most satisfied because the idea and execution was led by the young people of Dorset. She remembers thinking the van might be a white elephant and could not imagine at the time that it might be a successful enterprise. It was the members of FEWCHA who believed it could work and she says “it was only because of the young people’s persistence that it happened”.

FEWCHA and other activitiesThere is a mix of ideas and plans involved

in the FEWCHA experience. In July 2003 a two-day consultation, called “Big decision for the FEWCHA” was held at Bridport. The purpose of this was to encourage ideas from young people about a potential $150 000 grant from the Foundation for Young Australians. Ideas raised included building a large youth centre in Scottsdale. Members of FEWCHA interviewed in Scottsdale were aware that young people from other towns might not be too pleased with their town cornering the funds, but they liked the idea of a big central place to enjoy themselves. Other equally large and

problematic ideas were floated (including a multiplex of some sort) and at the time of interviews no consensus or decision had been reached.

Previously, FEWCHA had teamed up with another LGA and an independent youth group and organised a tour of regional Tasmania of Frenzal Rhomb – a well-known Australian rock band. Members of FEWCHA had also attended a young leaders’ conference in Melbourne, where they had met such notables as racing driver Peter Brock, football and television identity Eddie McGuire and, most memorably for some of the young women in the group, the lead singer of Bachelor Girl. Activities were not all so elevated, however. FEWCHA members interviewed were also proud of the fact that they had gone to one small town in the LGA and weeded the main street. They had been asked to do this for the town, and were happy to do it as the town in question had previously helped the group in another matter.

Working with young peopleThe YHO has worked generally towards

improving feelings of “connectedness” in young people in the LGA. As a long-term resident in the LGA with teaching experience in local towns and social work qualifications, the YHO was able to build upon existing connections with young people. Initially each town seemed distinct and alone from the others. Her aim has been to bring a sense of community among young people from all parts of the LGA. One of the unexpected outcomes has been the new-found connection between the rest of the community and its young people. FEWCHA and the KAMELEON, and the processes each have involved, have been central to these activities.

63

AchievementsAll those interviewed – young people, the

manager, and the YHO were also pleased at the more intangible effects of the group’s existence. A number of FEWCHA members said that they felt that council treated young people better as a group since the inception of FEWCHA. They were pleased that an ex-mayor chose to come to all of their meetings, a fact also related by the manager. The manager and YHO spoke of the increasingly prominent place of young people in the LGA since FEWCHA. Council was more aware of the needs of young people, and had started broadening the range of lower youth rates for council charges, especially on venues. Council had been very supportive, and never charged venue hire for official FEWCHA events. The mere presence of young people in council buildings and chambers had had a positive effect; relationships were being built “in both directions”. These positive sentiments spread to the broader community. The community accepted FEWCHA as a “good thing”, according to the manager, and were actively involved in promoting the image and activities of the group. This included suggestions that they apply for particular prizes and awards.

ChallengesThere are a number of challenges facing the

Dorset programs, most of them associated with resources. Much of this relates to the small size of the LGA and its consequent low revenue base. The federal funding of the YHO position is tenuous, and unless recurrent funding is found, will in all likelihood cease. Limited funding also restricts the number and operation of programs. The KAMELEON has been widely acknowledged as a very successful program, but neither the young people of FEWCHA nor the YHO believe it

runs regularly enough – it only goes out when requested or when the YHO has time to do it.

The manager and the YHO both worried that there is almost no service focus on young people from 17–25 years old. FEWCHA works in part because of the “captive” audience provided by schools. No such audience exists for older young people, making it hard to access this group. Population limits also militate against more tightly focused groups. There are problems facing young mothers in the region, but numbers are so small and geographically diverse that it is almost impossible to access them. This is true of a number of other possible target groups.

The last challenge faced in the Dorset LGA was that of personal cost for the workers in the field. The YHO stated that the job was “about a lifestyle, it’s not about doing a job”. It was very hard, she said, to “put boundaries around the job”. She goes to Launceston regularly for supervision to debrief concerning matters of counselling. Although the YHO had said that counselling was not central to her work, the manager described her as the “only port of call” in the LGA. It was enough of a strain that the supervision was, in the manager’s words, “absolutely necessary”. Like many such programs, FEWCHA and other activities for young people in the Dorset LGA are dependent upon motivated, competent workers for their survival.

Hornsby Shire Council Youth Services – Outreach program/outreach philosophy

The Hornsby Shire Council Youth Services are working towards creating a flexible and response-based service provision model, with outreach its foundation. The diverse



geographic and demographic spread of the shire has informed this choice of model. Of equal importance, however, is a desire for evidence-based youth services, where research and analysis lead to decisions that best utilise the available resources.

Hornsby Shire is on the northern limits of the Sydney metropolitan area, reaching to the Hawkesbury River. Its population in 2001 was 154 700 and diverse, with 16.8 per cent of the population speaking languages other than English (most commonly Cantonese and Mandarin) at home (Hornsby Shire Council 2000, p. 24).

History of the initiativeThe Youth Services Coordinator at

Hornsby Shire joined the council five years ago. At that time youth services was run out of one room in one suburb of the shire. The section then moved into Hornsby itself, based at a youth centre. Since then the youth services budget has almost quadrupled, and the services have become increasingly outreach-based.

In 1999 council undertook a review of Children’s and Youth Services. At that time, Hornsby employed a Community Development Officer – Youth; a centre-based coordinator and youth worker in Cherrybrook, a suburb of Hornsby; and a youth worker in an early school leavers program. The major council expense besides wages was a Vacation Care Program, which consumed $62 000 of the total youth budget of $163 000. This service was eventually outsourced, and the funds reverted to general youth services coffers.

As a result of the review, the Children’s Centre in central Hornsby was closed and transformed into a Youth Centre. It had been under-utilised as a child care centre, due in large part to the existence of many private

and council operated child care facilities. The Cherrybrook centre, also deemed to be under-utilised, was closed and its operations moved to the Hornsby centre.

More important to the Report than the rationalisation of council’s physical services was the shift in the model of service delivery. Council at this stage wanted to create a “one-stop-shop” model, with the Hornsby Centre as its focus. This was matched by a consolidation of the Community Development Officer and Vacation Activity Services into the present Youth Services Coordinator position.

In arguing for the development of a mobile outreach service, the report authors state that: “It is a method by which contact can be made with young people who do not frequent traditional youth services, but who would benefit from the range of resources and support that youth services provide”. (Hornsby Shire Council 1999). In May 2000, after much consultation with over 100 young people and other interested parties, council adopted a youth strategy that called for an outreach plan.

The philosophy

The coordinator stated his commitment to youth services that are “responsive and flexible” in service delivery, a “medium between youth and policy”, and sees an outreach model as the best way to achieve this. Part of this is based on cost-benefit thinking: outreach (especially into school populations) gives council “more bang for its buck”. It is also philosophical, however, reflecting some distrust of venue-based services, especially given the disparate spread of population throughout the shire. Youth workers “. . . are not site managers”, and their expertise should be used to best effect.

65

Unlike the situation in many local government youth services, research is seen as vital to achieving positive outcomes for young people at Hornsby. The coordinator cited the consultations involved in the creation of the 2001 strategy and in the upcoming youth plan as central to the validity of these developments. However, merely conducting research was not enough. Without rigorous analysis of results, he claimed, consultations could lead one astray. He argued that young people were likely to give stock answers when asked about their needs. While not denying the importance of drug and alcohol issues, and bullying, for example, he stated that young people refer to them almost reflexively – media coverage declared them to be the most important topics, so young people mention them.

Youth Services conducted field research supported by literature searches, which was then matched with “best-guessing” needs of particular areas or groups. By looking at what young people said they wanted, thinking about what current research said, and trying to formulate responses based on those factors, he hoped to provide best practice (and practical) solutions to real problems.

One example of this approach applied to the upcoming Youth Plan. The doubts and fears mentioned by young people in local research seemed to relate to issues of identity, to broad questions of what it means to be a young person/young adult today. In response, a chapter of the upcoming Youth Plan will be devoted to a discussion of identity and its relation to youth issues. As well as being an important part of improving service provision, the coordinator sees this as part of an educative process for council and the general public. It was important, he said, that the public should be able to read the plan, but he also wanted it to challenge their thinking about young people and services.

The projectThe outreach services provided by council

tend to fall into two broad groups: mobile outreach and youth workers in schools, although there is some overlap. The importance of collaboration between various services and organisations was important to the work, but most immediately apparent in the mobile outreach effort.

Mobile outreach

In 2002 council and the Hornsby–Ku-Ring-Gai Police and Community Youth Club (PCYC) developed and trialled a mobile outreach service around the shire. The trial found that being in the right place (where young people actually go), with the right vehicle and equipment (electronic entertainment gear including computer games, music and video equipment, and cooking facilities on board) led to successful interactions with young people (Hornsby CC63/02). This Mobile Resource Unit (MRU) has resulted in an ongoing collaboration between the council and the PCYC, which was in the process of being formalised when the council was visited.

From the police perspective, the collaboration has been successful on a number of fronts. It humanised one aspect of the police service in the eyes of young people who might otherwise be antagonistic. Having access to council staff and youth specialists, in particular, has been important, as police expertise with young people was limited. There had been no major differences of opinion or approach between the council workers and the police, according to both the PCYC representative and the council. When the collaboration started, there was some debate over whether or not police officers should be in uniform when on the outreach bus. The police successfully argued that it



was important that they are immediately recognisable, and as the PCYC officer said, “we are proud of our uniform”.

Some more serious issues seem to have been negotiated in practice if not in writing (although the draft agreement might deal with these). The general police focus is different from that of council. For the Police Local Area Command, the main aim is the reduction of crime. Mobile outreach offered a flexible response to different aspects of potential and actual criminal activity. There had been problems concerning so-called “gang” activities in public spaces – in particular allegations of “stand-over” conduct concerning mobile phones around the railway station. There were also the expected “anti-social” problems – young people drinking and swearing in public. The outreach bus was useful in defusing these situations, and also in accessing young people where they actually were.

The Youth Coordinator was also interested in this “practical response” aspect of the outreach bus project, but from a slightly different perspective. He also thought that it offered other opportunities: by responding quickly to reports of such behaviour, the MRU would help test the veracity of public concerns – whether or not young people were actually doing anything wrong, for example. The added bonus for council was that they were seen as being proactive on matters of concern to the community.

Both parties acknowledged that their dif-ferent positions and responsibilities could create difficulties. For instance, police and council Youth Services had different views on drugs, with police unable to condone the use of illicit substances, and Youth Services promoting a harm minimisation focus. No actual difficulties arising from this difference was cited, but both sides were aware of the potential for this.

In-school activities

The other major component of the Hornsby Youth Services is in-school work by the outreach team. Their activities are focused on high school students (12–18-year-olds) as a point of entry into the wider community. As a number of informants said, schools provide a captive audience of young people. There are two major school programs running at present. The first is the “Big Breakfast”. Council Youth Services visit selected schools before classes and provide a free and nutritious breakfast while also providing information on a range of issues, and being available to talk to anyone who might care to take the opportunity.

The schools targeted are those where research and experience indicates that inadequate breakfasts are likely to be common. This project represents one of the few hardware expenditures within the outreach scheme – council invested $1 200 on a commercial toaster. Local companies and stores provide fruit and juice at cost. The outreach leader reported anecdotal evidence that young people were taking leaflets and the like while at the “Big Breakfast”, and even discussing them with their friends.

The other major schools project has so far only involved one school, but illuminates the response-based nature of the overall plan. After discussions with staff, council youth workers were invited into a local high school to conduct a series of broadly health-based workshops. The Personal Development Health Physical Education teacher at a local girls high school, wanted “to do something” for her Year 10 girls at the end of 2002 “to make the end of year valid”. In Term 3 she met the Hornsby outreach team at a school welfare meeting. The Hornsby people were interested in working in the school environment, so the teacher invited

67

them to work with the Year 10 group. The class discussed what topics would be most useful, and agreed upon drugs and alcohol, issues of mental health (especially stress), and conflict.

The students elected to not have their teacher present when these topics were discussed. The teacher believed this freed the students in their discussions – the youth service people were perceived as being less threatening than teachers, a view supported by the Hornsby coordinator. The teacher was so impressed with the programs that she hopes to offer them again in late 2003. The sessions ran for one hour over four weeks, and involved various service providers from outside council. The teacher also invited the outreach team to a camp on health issues, although they had no official role in proceedings; they were there in case anyone might want to speak to them. The teacher said she was using the council services like another resource base, although she considered her relationship with the workers as collegial rather than client-based. The Hornsby Youth Services are also involved in bullying programs for Year 7 students.

As with the council/PCYC collaboration, schools and youth services come from a different orientation which is reflected in some ambivalence by the Hornsby team towards the schools program. While the school environment offers many opportunities, schools and people inside them were often wary of “outsiders” who “did not use curriculum-speak”. The outreach team was doing the school’s work with these programs – they were on the curriculum. The outreach leader was, however, sympathetic to the fact that schools and teachers often lacked the time to keep abreast of best practice and new knowledge in the field. The coordinator also

spoke of the power of offering curricular activities, but was concerned that schools seemed to be “impenetrable fortresses”.

Despite these reservations, the outreach leader was keen for the schools outreach to become a permanent program, and to expand in content and work across all years of high school. She also expressed a desire to work with Year 6 children to lessen the trauma of moving up to high school. One problem was the lack of interest shown by other schools in the area – and also by the restrictions of council boundaries. The team could not work with schools outside the council boundaries, but they could work with selective schools like Cheltenham, where many students came from outside the council to study.

ParticipationInterviews with a vertical section of council

staff at Hornsby revealed general agreement about the best way forward in youth services. There was a sense of commitment to and support for young people across the council hierarchy. All spoke about the importance of asking what young people wanted, and providing it through an outreach-based plan. Both the manager and the deputy mayor described council as “practically” apolitical, and the “really good political support” that youth services received from elected officials, with at least two proactively supportive of the model.

There was a strong consensus about community consultation as both a tool and an end in itself. Council had recently undertaken a series of “cul-de-sac consultations” – meetings that involved barbeques and minor street parties – as a means of finding out what people wanted. The deputy mayor spoke of the community-building aspect of these meetings; people



met their neighbours, he said, sometimes for the first time. The new youth plan was based on similar consultations, including a youth forum in council chambers. It was possible that such things might end up with only the “school captains” taking part, but they believed they had achieved a fair spread of the population.

From a council management perspective, all council activities, including youth services, depended upon well-managed finances. The youth plan formed an important part of a well-managed council, with staff and elected officials confident that a properly researched and resourced plan would minimise the possibility of erroneous decisions.

ConclusionAs these case studies demonstrate, local

government is experimenting with novel models of youth service which reflect the background and skills of a new generation of council workers hired particularly to work with young people. They understand the importance of including young people in the design and operation of services, as was the case with FEWCHA and the KAMELEON project. There is also more emphasis on evidence-based services, with Hornsby acknowledging the importance of research to the effectiveness of their services. An emphasis on partnerships between local government, police, schools, health authorities and other service providers is becoming characteristic of much youth service provision, with partners negotiating their way through their different agendas for and perspectives on young people.

IntroductionFinding appropriate ways to engage

with Indigenous young people has become an important component of many local government initiatives. Like other young people, this group is frequently problematised in terms of the risk they pose to community perceptions of order and safety. These issues are exacerbated for Indigenous young people, in part because of their lower participation rates in education and training, much higher unemployment, and consequent higher visibility in many communities. Except in Indigenous communities, local government authorities are overwhelmingly non-Indigenous, and engaging Indigenous young people in programs or services requires considerable skill and goodwill.

The following case studies have different foci – employment, drama, building social capital, and leadership – all of which seek to acknowledge the contribution Indigenous

young people can make, if they are accepted, supported and skilled in areas of interest to them. These projects also have the potential to build bridges between the wider Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities, and assist in what has been a growing movement of reconciliation in which local government has played a prominent role.

“About jobs” – Cairns City Council“About jobs” is a community employment

initiative of the Cairns City Council and Community Renewal targeted to the communities of the city’s western suburbs. Cairns is located in far north Queensland, with an economy based on tourism, fishing and cane sugar. The tourist strip of hotels, restaurants, international designer stores and souvenir shops winds around the Esplanade of the mangrove tidal bay. The whole city is surrounded by the Atherton Tablelands.

7Engaging with Indigenous young people


History of the initiativeAccording to the coordinator of the project,

the background to this initiative includes overty and interracial disharmony among the very ethnically mixed communities of the people of the Pacific – Cook Islanders, Torres Strait Islanders, Samoans, Maori, Papua New Guineans and Australian Indigenous people. The mayor and other citizens were concerned about violence in the Central Business District, mostly among young people (men and women) up to the age of 23–24. People were concerned about the possible impact of threats of violence on local tourism.

Many of these young people live in the western suburbs (Manoora, for instance, has an Indigenous population of 17 per cent), which include the largest concentrations of public housing outside of the Brisbane area, and experience high levels of unemployment and reliance on income support programs. According to one informant, a recent report documented community concern about vandalism, break-ins, abusive/offensive behaviour, juvenile offences, family violence, sexual assault, drug and alcohol misuse and truancy. These problems were largely attributed to lack of employment and poverty.

“About Jobs” commenced in April 2003. It started as an initiative of the West Cairns Youth Development Project, Community Renewal which is funded by the Manoora Community Renewal Project, auspiced by the Queensland State Department of Families, and delivered by Cairns City Council. The West Cairns Youth Development Project, in partnership with volunteers from the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporation for Tourism Queensland launched the pilot project to link residents of Manoora and Mooroobool to local employment opportunities.

The project initially ran on Saturday mornings at the Manoora Community Centre and Monday mornings at the Mooroobool Community Centre. These days were chosen as those most likely to be free for most people in the target groups. The only advertising was a long piece of butcher’s paper attached to the fence outside the community centre which read “Are you bored, sick of being broke, want a job? Drop in”. The first Saturday morning they attracted 22 people, and the numbers increased. They now have an average of about five people a day through the centre. One person brought in 10 relatives.

The projectThe objectives of the project are ambitious.

They are to:

create economic wealth and employment in disadvantaged communities in west Cairns; involve members of the community who are particularly disadvantaged in the labour market in implementing strategies to increase sustainable local employment and self-sufficiency; and promote social cohesion in the target communities and a holistic approach to barriers to employment (ATSICTQ 2003, pp. 1–2).

Initially the project was targeted at young people, particularly those with Indigenous and Islander backgrounds, as these were perceived as the groups needing the most employment assistance, and also those creating social disharmony. However, as the project has become more embedded in the community, and individuals brought other family members for assistance, it was clear that project staff needed to include adults as well. Officially the project now identifies its target groups as disadvantaged young people, the long-term unemployed, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people,

71

people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and mature aged people over 40.

The project’s primary base is the Manoora Community Centre, located in the heart of the community on the corner of a busy suburban street where locals pass by in cars, on bikes, and many on foot with babies in arms and in prams. The community centre stands out from its neighbours as it is covered in Indigenous artwork which local people completed over one weekend. Directly outside the centre is a much-used phone box. Inside the centre there is a large common room, small kitchen, computer room and some office space. Outside on the front verandah are a few plastic chairs where project staff and other locals can sit and chat to each other and passers-by.

The project is a lean operation. The only paid employee is the coordinator, who is a community planning and development officer with Cairns City Council. She manages external relationships with the council, employers, and overall administration of the project. Two volunteer staff from the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporation for Tourism Queensland work five days a week with the unemployed who come in for assistance. All three are mature women, living locally, one of whom is Indigenous. The premises are owned and subsidised by the Department of Housing and project staff and community members have access to computers donated by TAFE, upgraded under a work for the dole project with Mission Australia, and on desks provided by the Department of Housing. Apart from the coordinator’s salary, the only funding the project has received to date is $4 000 from the Cairns City Council, and used to fund other related projects which are described later.

When people come into the centre they fill in a registration form which determines their employment status, a basic employment history and an audit of their personal skills and abilities. One of the volunteer staff with good computer skills then works with each person on putting together their curriculum vitae. This is not a straightforward task, as many people have little formal previous employment and need to have their knowledge and skills sometimes painfully extracted from them. For instance, young women who initially claimed to have no skills worth recording, but who might be cooking for up to fifteen people at home, looking after their own young children and their aged parents come to see how to promote these experiences to future employers. Many of the young people are also bi- or multi-lingual, but because these languages are indigenous to Australia and the Pacific, they have not been taught to value them outside their communities. Project staff encourage them to list these languages as important skills.

Having put together a CV, the person’s work readiness is then assessed by both volunteers. This includes being confident, having experienced an interview situation, or having previous employment. If necessary clients are trained in interview techniques by the Indigenous volunteer, who has extensive experience in education, training and employment. Training consists of both practical employment skills, and a broader approach which focuses on the culture of work (which is about, “attitude, attitude, attitude”). Again this often has to start with some fundamental, but often unstated prerequisites for work, like personal hygiene, clothing, grooming, verbal and non-verbal communication, such as eye contact and shaking hands. The project also makes use of an Indigenous motivational speaker who

Chapter 7Engaging with Indigenous young people


encourages young people to contribute to their communities, rather than simply focus on themselves.

Next young people are coached in the most asked questions in interviews. Then time is spent talking to them about what they want to do, and searching for suitable job vacancies. Before contacting a prospective employer, clients are helped to prepare a script for the initial telephone contact. Before a face-to-face interview, details such as appropriate clothing, jewellery and transport to the interview are all discussed.

If someone gets a job, project staff hear about it formally from the employer and informally from community members. Their location and frequent casual contact with the community mean they get to hear about who is doing well and not so well and are therefore able to offer support if it is needed.

The wider contextWhat makes this project important is the

broader history of employment of Indigenous and Islander populations. Across Australia these groups experience significantly higher rates of unemployment than other Australians and Cairns is no different. For more than thirty years there has been a number of specific employment initiatives aimed at these groups, but these have failed to markedly reduce inequalities in employment. Servicing these groups is a thriving, now privatised, industry, and in Cairns there are a number of large job search agencies contracted to work with local unemployed people. As each unemployed person registers for employment with an agency, it receives a fee from the Commonwealth government, and is, in addition, paid for up to 100 hours per person for job search training. If the person subsequently gets a job, the agency receives a fee for each person. These agencies have limited understanding of the

needs of poor, Indigenous or Pacific Island peoples, according to project staff. Many of the agencies are difficult to get to for people without cars, and lack of regular transport is a big issue for many people.

Related projectsThe project’s location in the community

centre, and project staff involvement with the broader community, has led to another important initiative – the Friday night event for young people. Held alternatively at the Indiji Youth Centre and Mooroobool Community Centre from 6–10 p.m. the event is hosted by a local Samoan/Indigenous couple with assistance from the “About Jobs” staff and young volunteers associated with a church group. Up to 200 young people aged from 12–20 (and sometimes younger) are given a meal (donated from local businesses), play a number of different sports, and hear indirect health promotion messages about binge drinking, chroming, and sexual health (through brochures, casual conversations and the like). Attempts to tackle inter-ethnic conflict sensitively are made by having referees for games from ethnic groups different from the players. The event is assisted with $2 000 from Cairns City Council for foods and other essentials. The group is currently seeking access to a bus so young people can be transported to the event and back home.

Project staff have also assisted with the establishment of a girl’s soccer team. This came about after some girls were involved in minor vandalism. The “About Jobs” coordinator successfully applied for some funds from the Cairns City Council and Community Renewal, and these have assisted with the purchase of equipment and uniforms.

Other projects on the drawing board include the establishment of an Indigenous and Islander dance group, able to perform

73

in Novotel resorts and the casino. Currently there are very few Indigenous or Islander people working in visible positions in the tourist industry, in spite of the prominence of Indigenous culture in tourist promotion.

Stakeholder involvement

Key stakeholders in the establishment of the “About Jobs” initiative and related projects are the Cairns City Council, Manoora Community Renewal Project, the Department of Families and the Manoora Community Centre Management Committee. Education Queensland, Department of Employment and Training and Department of Industrial Relations have contributed to the program by facilitating access to information about services available to job seekers. The Novotel Accor group which has 3 000 hotels nationally has recently been working with the project in order to find suitable Indigenous young people for their Indigenous employment program and they state that they are seeking up to 60 trainees for Cairns who can be trained and employed in the hospitality industry.

Another industry partner has been a local, Indigenous-owned driving school, and the project is using this association to encourage people to obtain their driver’s licences. The absence of a licence is a real disadvantage for many positions, and having access to an Indigenous driving instructor has meant that a number of people have signed up for driver training.

The Friday night events have been assisted by a number of other individuals and agencies, including the local police, police liaison officers and staff from the Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drugs office who have presented informally on a range of health promotion issues.

Publicity for “About Jobs” and related projects has been generated through Bumma Bippera Indigenous radio which is widely listened to by Indigenous and Islander groups. “Good news” stories about the projects have been run by the Cairns Sun. This promotional work means that Cairns City Council management, Community Renewal and other key stakeholders have heard and read positive stories which they are able to use to generate continuing support for the projects.

ParticipationWhen asked about the way in which young

people have participated in the “About Jobs” and related projects, the coordinator stated that she sought advice from young people working on after-school programs and other projects. Ten turned up when she asked them to a meeting to advise her on what kids wanted (she supplied pizza and coke), particularly for the Friday night event, and they became her Youth Advisory Committee. The group ranges in age from 14–24, and are mostly girls (eight out of the ten). The group is ethnically mixed, with mainly Cook Islanders, some Samoans, and one Indigenous young person. Some are associated with a local church group and form part of the volunteers each Friday. They meet weekly to discuss what’s happening each Friday, and can be called in whenever the need arises. Observations of a regular meeting in which a post-mortem of the previous Friday night event was held and future plans discussed, revealed enthusiasm about the sports offered and the food (“not healthy stuff”!).

AchievementsAccording to project staff, approximately

105 people have now been registered for employment in three months. Of these, 27



have been placed in employment. This includes an apprentice baker who, once he finishes his apprenticeship, will be the sole provider of fresh bread in the Cape York region. Others have been placed as: apprentice chef; security officer; police liaison officer; bus driver; administration assistant; and traffic controller. This employment has not simply alleviated poverty in families, it has also led to noticeable improvements in self-esteem, much broader networks in the community, and less vandalism and graffiti, according to the coordinator and volunteers.

The response from the local community, with people bringing in family and friends, has been tremendous, according to one volunteer. She claims that Islanders, Murris, and Kooris from down south have been into the centre to register for work.

Each person interviewed identified a number of factors as contributing to the success of the project. These included the comfortable, no-nonsense approach of the staff, “we don’t come across as the system, no cold office – they just walk in and say ‘hi, I’m here’”. Another talked about the importance of showing each person that you cared about who they are and their goals, of getting to know their individual passions.

Central to success appears to be the fortuitous combination of the skills and personalities of the three women involved. The management and community involve-ment skills of the coordinator; the gregarious personality, passionate approach and deep experience of the Indigenous volunteer; and the complementary office and computing skills of the other volunteer all contribute to a balanced, nurturing team. All women know about the way in which paid work can transform lives (and how central unpaid work is to community life!), they identify as

members of the community, and have heart and compassion. These credentials seem to be crucial to the people who came into the community centre.

Cairns City Council in general, and the coordinator’s line manager in particular, have been supportive of the project. This involves managing up the council, and dealing with any necessary bureaucratic details.

ChallengesMost of the difficulties identified by project

staff relate to funding and the frustrations of dealing with the job networks. In retrospect, the coordinator says she would have gone straight to the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR) to attempt to negotiate a more formal working relationship between the job networks and the project. This would, ideally, have meant a transfer of funds to the project for those staff registered with the job networks, but who have been trained and placed in employment by “About Jobs”. These funds could have paid the voluntary staff and allowed the project to provide more support for clients. The continuity of the project is dependent upon finding more secure funding, and a submission has been made to the Department of Education and Training for salaries, and associated project expenses.

The Messenger/Dreaming Project – City of Fremantle

The Messenger/Dreaming project is a collaborative endeavour between the City of Fremantle and SWERVE, an organisation of artists based in the Fremantle area in Western Australia. The LGA encompasses a range of residential areas, from up-market inner city-style living in the city precinct to lower socio-economic ex-

75

public housing developments. Industries range from entertainment and restaurant/café strips to heavy industrial and artistic workshops and studios. It is still a major port for the Perth region, both in terms of trade and as the home of a major fishing fleet. It is also possessed of an important cultural and artistic heritage, with a strong “alternative” bent.

The Messenger project is a physical theatre project – stilt walking, bungee activities, and acrobatics – provided for Indigenous young people in one part of the Fremantle area. The program culminated in a performance for NAIDOC Week celebrations at the Fly By Night Club in Fremantle on July 11 2003. The Dreaming project concerns itself with local “Dreaming” stories and cultural awareness for local Indigenous young people, and aims to encourage young Indigenous people to positively identify with and to perpetuate their culture and community.

Other groups, including the local Police and Community Youth Centre (PCYC), arts organisations and individuals, and the local Indigenous community, have had and continue to play important roles in the provision of the program and in its acceptance and success.

History of the initiativeIn 2000 the LGA created a reconciliation

policy document in close collaboration with the local Indigenous community. During this process, elders in the Indigenous community voiced fears for the younger generation, worried that they were becoming a “lost generation”. The following year a decision was made to create an arts program specifically targeting young Indigenous people. To make it more attractive to this group, it was decided that such a program should be based in the open air, and deal with contemporary Indigenous culture.

The City of Fremantle was already running an arts program for young people, which introduced them to various artistic forms and endeavours in the Fremantle area – including the Spare Parts puppet theatre company, the Film and Television Institute, and Bizurcus (a local alternative circus company).

In 2000 and 2001, SWERVE ran the first incarnations of the “Messenger” project in Hilton, a suburb within the City of Fremantle with a significant Indigenous population. The name “Messenger” was based on the idea of travelling door-to-door bringing news and information; the originators from SWERVE wanted the project to be like someone bringing pleasant news to the community. “Messenger” was predicated on the idea of delivering services to the area – in this instance local artists and performers wanted to deliver their skills to the local young Indigenous people. Central to the idea was a sense of community building, and also of artists and performers being able to deliver back into their own communities. The intention was to assist young Indigenous people in the area to reconnect with older members of their own community.

In January 2002, 40 young people took part in a music, dance and painting performance project run by SWERVE. This eventuated in a rap-based piece, where a backdrop was created while the song was performed. The project performed at the Fremantle Children’s Fiesta.

Towards the end of the 2001–2002 financial year, funds became available to the City of Fremantle’s Community Development and Community Arts Officer (CDO). Thus the “Dreaming” project was born. The CDO involved local community leaders and elders, and travelled around the area, visiting homes and inviting people to take part in the project.



Recognised cultural leaders took fifty young Indigenous people on trips of the local area and taught them specific dreaming stories of the area, especially the mouth of the Swan River. Over two days the young people were taken to the various sites involved, on the first day by bus, and on the second by boat. A workbook was developed for the young people to fill in as they went. They also created sand sculptures, made maps of the areas, and took photos. The project coincided with the centenary of the opening of the river mouth. The young people met a descendant of the engineer responsible for opening the river, C. Y. O’Connor, as well as meeting the Lord Mayor of Fremantle. Having learnt the dreaming story, the young people created a puppet and dance piece telling the story, which they performed at the Fremantle Festival. Their work represented the greatest ever involvement of Indigenous people in the festival – the young people opened the festival one day, performed the next, and then led the festival parade the next.

In 2003 the young people of the area were keen to carry on learning and performing. At this time, however, the CDO was seconded to another LGA. It was at this point that SWERVE informed her that they had a project ready to go. The combination of a ready-made program, run by a group familiar to the council, was persuasive and gratefully accepted by council staff. SWERVE (collectively, but in fact in the person of the coordinator) was sub-contracted by council to coordinate the Messenger project in early 2003.

The projectThe Messenger project was a physical

theatre project, involving numerous arts and other organisations from the

Fremantle area, aimed predominantly at 8–15-year-olds. As the coordinating body, SWERVE was deeply involved, but so were other performance organisations. Cirque Bizurque (formally Bizurcus) played an important part. Cirque Bizurque is a long-established Fremantle circus company and circus school; it was a source of training expertise, and its base was also used as a venue for some other activities.

Messenger consisted of six weeks of workshops and rehearsals, culminating in a performance at a noted Fremantle venue. The organisers were taken aback when 50 young people appeared on the first day. This posed problems for the first day’s work. As the coordinator noted, circus skills are dangerous, and tutor-student ratios must be low – at least six tutors or assistants were present at workshops. Throughout the project, no less than 35 young people took part in the classes/workshops/rehearsals.

While SWERVE was the main organisation in control of Messenger, it was not alone. The City of Fremantle provided a large amount of money and in-kind support for the project. The coordinator had use of office facilities – phones, computers and printers especially – that lowered the cost for SWERVE. The LGA estimated that the costs to council were about $6 750 and the total project was budgeted at around $11 750. Other funds were made available from state arts bodies, the Office of Youth Affairs, and other sources. Late in the project, the City of Cockburn also became involved in the project, providing the use of a bus (after the PCYC vehicle broke down).

The legal dangers inherent in circus work were ameliorated by the fact that SWERVE, Cirque Bizurque, and the PCYC had public liability insurance for the participants. PCYC could only provide this for financial

77

members, and the project paid memberships for all participants.

The Fremantle PCYC was an integral part of the project. The PCYC is situated in Hilton, and SWERVE approached the manager of the PCYC (the manager) to use the building as a rehearsal space for the project. The manager was happy to be involved in the project on a number of counts. He knew the people from SWERVE already, having met some of them at various conferences, and through their previous Messenger activities, and was happy to work with them. He also saw the project as an opportunity to make a connection with the local Indigenous population: although there is a significant local Indigenous population in the area, with a high percentage of young people, there was no history of Indigenous engagement with the PCYC.

Another positive outcome from his perspective was that such activities were viewed as an “effective and meaningful form of crime prevention”; indeed the only “real way to do it”. In more general terms, he thought that the project provided a space for young Indigenous people to have positive interactions with police officers. He was also set to take part in the performance – playing a policeman chasing young people across the stage, he thought. He seemed quietly pleased that the young people wanted him to be involved at this level. The partnership between the PCYC, community workers and organisations like SWERVE was also seen as a long-term benefit.

Indigenous elders were heavily involved in this program. The network established after SWERVE’s earlier work and the Dreaming project, was used to publicise the new project through the Indigenous community. A SWERVE report notes that “involvement of

adult, family members and elders” was one aim of the project. Information about the project was disseminated via the “grapevine” and the “bush telegraph”. Team members visited around 15 key community members and families in their homes, to explain the purpose of the project, its structure and management, and to invite their family’s participation. During the project, community members were involved as bus drivers, cooks, support workers, and as the performance approached, in producing costumes, helping with staging and similar activities.

A local Indigenous man was the main bus driver for the project. The bus was vital to the success of the project: although the project was based in Hilton, young people from around the Fremantle region became involved, and were picked up and dropped home by bus. This service was important in getting people to and from the workshops, but it had ancillary benefits as well. The manager stated that the presence of a respected older male figure in the project had a very positive effect among many of the young people who lacked strong male role models. Having come to know the driver, the manager is keen to use his services in other aspects of the PCYC program.

Food was planned as an integral part of proceedings. Workshops took place on Saturday mornings and morning tea and lunch was provided for the participants. Community members produced the food. The powerful positive effects of getting the younger and older members of the community to eat together were consciously sought by the organisers.

The wider contextBoth the Messenger and Dreaming projects

are concerned with community building and community restoration. Informants spoke of



the broad and historical problems faced by Indigenous Australians, and of the need to help the local Indigenous community to increase in self-confidence. They also spoke of the importance of general community building. The coordinator said that one of the spurs to action had been a desire of the artists in SWERVE to be able to work over a sustained period of time in their own community.

Achievements

At the time of our visit, the Messenger performance had not taken place, but council staff seemed keen to undertake similar programs again. Another version of the Dreaming project was being prepared, and it was hoped that the young people who had taken part in the first Dreaming project might become cultural ambassadors or cultural teachers in the region, by taking the stories and knowledge from the first Dreaming into local schools and spreading local cultural knowledge. There was also a possibility of involving noted Indigenous performers in a new version of the project.

From the coordinator’s perspective, the strengths of the Messenger project were largely unintended consequences for individuals involved in the project. Some of the young people had been accepted into Cirque Bizurque’s circus school. During the rehearsal/workshop period, about twelve young people from the project had become semi-regular users of the PCYC – following the experiences of the project some had joined the PCYC trampolining classes, while others were just using the available facilities in an ad hoc manner. Prior to the project there was almost no Indigenous use of the centre or its facilities, according to the manager.

ChallengesThe chief practical challenge to future

projects like Messenger is funding. Messenger cost about $1 000 per week to run the program as it was, even with considerable donated services. The coordinator was working a three-day week, for example, whilst being paid for only nine hours. In part the project’s success contributed to the financial strain. SWERVE had planned on about 30 participants, but stretched to accommodate about 50.

The informal methods of publicising the project also gave rise to potential problems, such as leaving some families outside the loop. This did not eventuate, however, and the potential problem was also a strength of the project. The fact that this project was not run through schools or other “official” bodies gave it a different emphasis within the community, and made it easier for people to become involved.

Acceptance of Indigenous social and cultural practices highlighted some issues and helped overcome other problems. Young Indigenous people caring for their younger siblings and relatives raised the numbers in the project, stretching the capacities for adequate supervision. They also made duty of care an issue. The occasional transient nature of the community also posed some challenges to organisers outside the community. Young Indigenous people do not always have settled domestic arrangements, for a large number of reasons. To accommodate these diverse circumstances, the organisers had to become aware of alternate places where young people might be staying, in order to pick them up.

The manager noted that some regular users of the PCYC were a bit peeved by the Indigenous-only aspect of Messenger. They thought it should be open to all PCYC

79

users. The manager agreed that in “a perfect world” it would be open to all but realised that the success of the project was in great part due to its specific Indigenous focus.

Moonah Community Group – Moreland City Council

The Moonah Community Group is a community strengthening initiative that is auspiced by the Brunswick Public Tenants’ Association, managed by a group of local residents and supported by the Moreland City Council, in Melbourne. The group is made up of residents of the Gronn Place public housing estate in West Brunswick, a relatively small estate of 80 flats in an area where there are numerous single storey public houses. Issues facing residents of this estate are similar to those confronting others living in high-rise public housing estates in Melbourne’s inner suburbs. These include social problems either felt or generated by young people who are involved in substance use, crime and other risk factors.

History of the initiative

Prior to the establishment of the Moonah Community Group there had been a long association between council staff and local residents as a consequence of ongoing issues to do with social order. Indeed those consulted claimed that there had been at least a ten-year history of social problems in and around the estate. Youth crime, drug taking, domestic violence, regular contact with police and fire service officers, frequent public fights and violence, family problems and other “high risk” activity had been identified by residents, council staff and community service organisations. These issues had been articulated in the local media over some time.

Council officers had instituted a Youth Activities Support Program for two years. As a consequence of contact with local residents the council youth worker had identified a key group who had expressed concerns about the future for young people and a commitment to work together to provide opportunities for locals. This prompted a request from a group of parents who approached council for a volleyball net for the young people. This group of parents, many from the Cook Islands, was motivated by a desire to “turn things around”.

In 2001 this prompted a synergy between local people and council, who had been concerned about the social health of young people and local residents. At the same time resources became available through the Victorian Department of Human Services for initiatives aimed at strengthening the community and for projects with a drug and alcohol focus. Resources were sought and $20 000 over three years was received for the establishment of a community group that would plan a range of activities to counter youth-related problems and involve other members of the community in improving their own circumstances.

The projectThe Moonah Community Group aims to

involve the community and achieve social harmony by bringing people together to participate in educational, social, recreational and culturally diverse activities in a safe, fun and healthy environment for children, young people, families, adults and older adults living in the Moonah ward. The project has an emphasis on preventing substance abuse amongst young people and stresses the importance of building positive connections between young people and their families and community, arguing that when this occurs young people are less



likely to experience substance abuse and other social problems.

Those groups considered to be at most risk of experiencing drug and alcohol problems include the following young people:

• those from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities;

• those with a low level of education;

• those from a low-income family;

• those who are socially disconnected from the wider community; and

• those who are disconnected from their family.

A youth committee and a general adult committee run the project, meeting each week to plan a variety of recreational and social experiences for Moonah’s young people. Initially this focus on young people resulted in activities that were youth targeted. However, this soon led to increased involvement from parents, other family members and adult residents. Both groups decided to concentrate their efforts around the Gronn Place public housing estate in West Brunswick. Activities organised and carried out by the Moonah group include:

• a draft agreement between the Moonah Community Group and the Brunswick Public Tenants Association;

• development of Moonah Community Group membership cards;

• school holiday activities, including free recreation activities and discounted use of local recreation facilities;

• a community festival;

• two family sports days attended by over 80 people;

• an afternoon tea for local women and their children;

• a Halloween party;

• a gentle exercise program;

• training for members of the committees;

• a mock submission writing process;

• a logo competition;

• the production of T-shirts and caps;

• first-aid training;

• a homework support group conducted twice per week;

• preparation of media releases on posi-tive outcomes of the group; and

• a breakfast program for local primary school students.

ParticipationThe project is based on the idea that for

initiatives to be successful there must be significant involvement of young people in the planning and carrying out of events. Each week a group of young people meet independently of the adult group to talk about their plans and aspirations. This meeting is supported by a youth worker from the Moreland City Council. Immediately after this meeting the adult committee meets. Young people are invited to be a part of this meeting and routinely bring their discussions and plans. The youth committee has direct access to the group’s funds and bring their requests to the larger group who, according to those consulted, always support young people’s plans.

The group draws on a model of youth leadership features of which are: an emphasis on family involvement; the importance of older young people “buddying up” with younger people; and team or group work. This approach to encouraging young people’s active participation is strongly shaped by the cultural influence of community members from the Cook Island. During community events young people are invited to make up four teams, with much emphasis on cooperation and

81

collaboration. Team members are of different ages and from different families so that young people develop forms of leadership that are not reliant on the already existing social structures.

According to informants, this approach encourages the involvement of those young people who might otherwise not be recognised as talented. Actively involving young people during the course of the activity rather than simply during meetings and formal discussions is also important as it makes the experience of leadership and participation positive and fun and not simply associated with formalities and conduct that bores many. It also demonstrates to young people that they can influence outcomes and they can get involved even where there might be a level of competition or conflict. Finally this approach to participation involves much contact and work with adult members of the community. This allows young people to articulate what they would like to see happen, have adults model how they participate and allows them to work with adults without adults controlling the agenda.

AchievementsAccording to participants, the key

accomplishment of the Moonah Community Group has been its formation and subsequent success in organising a range of events. The group has registered over 240 members, most of whom are residents in the area. Over 80 people attend community sports days. Importantly, the group has been able to act with a high degree of autonomy, initiating and managing all of its projects.

The group’s work has also fostered relationships with other neighbourhood groups. For example, a similar community group from Prahran was invited to attend

the last community sports day. As a consequence both groups are planning to arrange ongoing events.

Participants claim that the group has had a substantial influence on the reduction of crime and anti-social behaviour in and around the estate. There is anecdotal evidence of decreased vandalism on the estate and increased positive interaction between residents. Police and fire service personnel have received fewer requests to attend the estate and themselves claim that violence, youth misbehaviour and anti-social behaviour has dropped considerably.

Many participants directly attribute the success of the group to the role played by a number of key families, most of whom migrated from the Cook Islands in the past five years. This group of people, many of whom are women, are highly motivated, put many hours of voluntary work into the group and enjoy considerable respect and influence within their families and community.

Another reason for the group’s success appears to have been the fact that state government funds became available at precisely the moment when the group was forming and council was expressing an interest in supporting initiatives in the area. The particular emphasis of this funding program, with its stress on addressing the needs of young people by applying principles such as community connections and strengthening, seemed to match the needs and aspirations of those involved.

ChallengesThe group faces a series of challenges

as they attempt to consolidate their early successes. An immediate issue identified was the need for the group to become more efficient in planning events and programs, and skilled for preparing funding submissions



in order to attract further resources to allow them to continue with their work.

Many thought that too much responsibility was being shouldered by too few individuals, that there were “the same faces . . . behind the planning of all events”. One consequence of strong leadership and involvement by some community members is that others can assume that the group is exclusively committed to one group’s interests, and feel alienated. This issue is exacerbated by the transient nature of the estate population. If key members of the community group were to move out of the area in the early stages of the group’s life this would leave substantial gaps in skills and may result in the group losing momentum until new leaders are found.

Another tension involves the balance between council support for planning and events organisation and fears that it may, unwittingly, exert too much influence over the group. As one report identified, “it was felt that external bodies may, in their attempts to support, actually hinder the process by tacitly assuming control resulting in residents feeling disempowered and alienated from the project”.

Another feature of the estate is the variety of cultural and linguistic backgrounds of residents. Communicating and sharing ideas between community members can be difficult enough even when all share a fairly common language. When different families use English as their second language this can be accentuated as a problem. This means that an important challenge facing a group such as this will be articulating their plans and aspirations in ways that are accessible to many.

The continuity of the project is dependent upon accessing ongoing funding. Given that the project’s success was associated with

a policy shift towards funding community engagement initiatives, Moonah is reliant on the continuing popularity of this policy regime. Should this change the group may need to review its operational style and objectives if it is to attract funds in the future.

PALS – Promoting Aboriginal Leadership in Schools – Campbelltown City Council and the New South Wales Department of Education and Training

The Promoting Aboriginal Leadership in Schools (PALS) program is a collaborative effort between Campbelltown City Council and the New South Wales Department of Education and Training (DET). There is also involvement with three other LGAs, and some federal funding has been provided. As its title suggests, the program aims to develop Aboriginal school leaders, in the hope that they will in turn become leaders in the Aboriginal and wider communities. It is derived from an already existing scheme, but the involvement of council is unique.

Campbelltown is situated approximately an hour by road south of Sydney. Covering 312 square kilometres, it is populated by 150 000 people, of whom 3 600 identify as Indigenous (making it the LGA with the second largest Indigenous population in New South Wales). Industries include heavy manufacturing and farming, and residential areas comprise both old and new developments.

Campbelltown City Council Youth Services Unit employs three full-time staff – a Youth Services Coordinator, a Youth Project Officer, and an Aboriginal Youth Project Officer. The council also employs a dedicated Aboriginal Community Development Officer.

83

History of the initiativeIn 2000, the Clarence/Coffs Harbour school

district [on the New South Wales northern coast] identified the need to improve the participation of Aboriginal students in School Representative Councils (SRCs) and other school forums. The program that was subsequently developed became known as SLIKK – Student Leadership is for Koori Kids. It was very successful, and led to other DET districts taking up the model (DEST 2001, p. 36). The Federal Department of Education, Science and Training Report of 2001 describes the program:

a culturally appropriate leadership program for secondary Aboriginal students, was developed to raise the level of participation of Aboriginal students in SRCs through the development of skills and confidence to participate fully in meetings and other activities and to improve attendance and retention levels (DEST 2001, p. 36).

Following the success of SLIKK, DET encouraged other districts to work on similar leadership projects, and $5 000 per district was made available from their Indigenous Education Strategic Initiatives Programme (IESIP). Part of the aim is to retain Indigenous students until at least Year 10. The need to increase retention is important – across the nation only 85.7 per cent of Indigenous students completed Year 10 in 2001, compared to approximately 98 per cent of non-Indigenous students (DEST 2001, p. 58).

In late 2001 meetings were held with representation from DET, council, the Department of Community Services (DOCS), and various local Aboriginal groups, including the local Land Council, and other community groups. They agreed to work together on a program that would combine mentoring and leadership development.

The projectTraining commenced in 2001, at this

time still following the SLIKK outline. Four potential leaders were invited from high schools with Aboriginal students within the Campbelltown and Liverpool areas (both being part of the same DET district). The program targets students in Years 7–10, the compulsory years of schooling in New South Wales. Students in the lower years of school have more time for such external activities, while many Year 11 and 12 students become increasingly focused on the Higher School Certificate. The present Consultant Aboriginal Education (CAE) described the selected students as basically the “quiet” Aboriginal kids in schools. They were not “bad” kids, but shyness and fear of failure were extremely evident in the group. They had never been involved in leadership, and had to learn the skill. A main aim of the program was to reduce the risk and fear of failure while supporting them, so that they might take their place on Student Representative Councils (SRC).

Members of the Aboriginal community were invited to training sessions. Also present were four Student Welfare Consultants from DET district office, the Campbelltown Aboriginal Youth Project Officer, and Aboriginal Student Liaison Officers from the various schools, who usually deal with matters of student attendance and retention. The transport, lunch, and venue costs were paid by council and some government grant moneys. The students were taken through a series of exercises about what leadership entails, and what it means to be a leader, and they discussed SLIKK. Their first task was to decide upon a name for the project. The students selected the PALS acronym, which was originally suggested by one of the students. Having chosen a name, the group worked on a logo – which was



eventually designed by one student. This was the last act for the program in 2001 – it occurred in the last term of the school year. More importantly, no plans were made for the following year.

In 2002, staffing changes were made in both DET and council and the new Council Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Youth Project Officer noticed that the program had “idled”, so he instigated a meeting to restart PALS. This led to another training day, this time funded with DET money. About a dozen schools took part, again from the Campbelltown and Liverpool LGAs. In the end, 36 students attended the training day. The support group was again large – four Aboriginal Education Assistants, two Student Welfare Consultants, the CAE, two Aboriginal Student Liaison Officers, two Aboriginal Community Liaison Officers, all from DET, council’s Project Officer, and four Aboriginal community elders.

A young Koori student leader from Sydney Secondary College – a member of his SRC – was invited, as were Aboriginal students from Bass Hill High School. These students, in Years 7 and 9 gave a PowerPoint presentation on the Aboriginal culture day they had run at their school. Bass Hill is in the Bankstown City Council area, part of the same DET district as Campbelltown. The group workshopped the types of activities that they might run in their own schools. They broke into school groups, and worked up ideas that might make the transition from primary school to secondary school easier for Indigenous children.

In the afternoon they did some physically challenging exercises. The aims of these were to show that these young people could overcome obstacles and do things that were foreign and threatening. Obviously, the analogy was that having overcome these

scary moments, the young people could also overcome the potentially threatening idea of becoming leaders at school. Having mastered the dangerous physical encounters, the young people were presented with certificates by members of the local Aboriginal community.

Reviewing their activities, the organisers realised that while they had made improvements on the previous year’s activities, there were still serious flaws in the concept. The 2002 program had given the young people a sense of what it might actually mean to be leaders within their own community within school. They had also received some recognition for their efforts on the training day, from members of their own community. These were improvements, but the flaws remained.

Foremost among them was the fact that school authorities were in the dark about the content of the program. More importantly, perhaps, the program had given the students a sense of what might be done but not how these ideas might be implemented. There was no budget for the program, nor had they worked on how funds could be obtained. To make matters worse, Term 4 came along, and everyone became too busy to carry through with any new work. As the CAE describes it, “we fell down big time”.

However, the project officer started the ball rolling again in 2003, contacting the CAE to get PALS off the ground. They decided that there needed to be an increased involvement of the local Aboriginal community. They also determined that it was necessary to provide relevant skills training to the participants to support any future activities they decided upon. These included:

• public speaking;

• project management; and

• meeting procedure.

85

While some schools were dropped from the program, in 2003 the selection came from a wider pool. Schools from the Fairfield Council were invited, as well as those from Campbelltown, Bankstown, and Liverpool Councils. Now the program matched the DET zoning, at least nominally. Campbelltown was still the only council organisationally and financially involved, however.

Rather than one big training day, this year the organisers decided to work initially and intensively with four representative students, and then have them assist in training the rest of the group. Community leaders were also involved in this preparatory day. One student was selected from each council area to “train to lead the leaders”. While the students were being led through the speaking and management issues, the community elders were also working. Indigenous leaders split into male and female groups, and planned a cultural leadership session. The aim of this was to encourage the students into leadership by reminding them of leadership in Aboriginal society, both historically and in contemporary times.

A month later the main training day took place. In addition to the cohort from April, the organisers ensured that there were official representatives from each school with students in the program. These were Aboriginal Education Assistants and SRC teachers. The students were split into small groups, and then taken through the program by the “leaders’ leaders”. Adult supervisors stayed with each group in case the individuals needed help, but the aim was to let the student leaders run the sessions. One of the group of four was almost too scared to attend the session, and only went when assured that she would not have to run sessions if she did not want to. She duly attended, and ran all the sessions in her

category. After lunch, the students split into male and female groups, and were spoken to about cultural aspects of leadership by the community leaders.

Assessing the May meeting, the organisers realised that schools were still not officially involved, although representatives had at least been present. A change to the organisation took place at this time, and the four “leader leaders” were made part of the committee.

At this time Aboriginal community leaders decided that it was time that the students got some reward from the exercise, and a trip away was chosen as the best thing. The project officer proposed taking the students to Canberra for three days, hopefully to meet some Aboriginal leaders, and to expose the students to highest level leadership. Canberra also has many sites of educational and cultural interest. The project officer convinced Campbelltown Council of the merit of the exercise and the council paid for the transport, accommodation and food for the trip. DET funds covered the costs of activities and admission to museums and other cultural centres.

In Canberra, the students met with numerous Indigenous leaders. At Parliament House, Senator Aden Ridgeway spoke to the group at length, and was photographed with each student. At the Institute of Sport, the group met Nova Peris, who has represented the nation at both hockey and athletics and was the first Indigenous Australian to win an Olympic gold medal. Peris spent more than twice her allotted time with the group. They also met an Indigenous soldier at the War Memorial. While in Canberra the students completed a workbook. The trip was designed to be intellectually challenging as well as entertaining and enjoyable. The CAE described the group as the best collection of students



she had ever travelled with, saying that their behaviour was “exemplary”.

On return from their trip, council hosted an official Lord Mayoral Reception. This included active participation from the PALS group – presenting an I-movie of their trip, singing a song composed for the occasion, and being presented with certificates and framed photographs to mark the experience. According to the project officer, the “reception went better than well! It was fabulous!”

Achievements Formal evaluations of the project will be

undertaken by DET and students involved. So far, however, there have been some positive outcomes. Since returning from Canberra, three students have attended the State Student Representative Conference. Six others have attended the inter-district SRC Conference, where they presented a 30-minute PowerPoint presentation to the 70 participants on the PALS program. One student has been selected as an exchange student to Japan in 2004. At least seven students have been elected to their SRCs in recent school elections. The whole 31 students will be running the Regional Aboriginal Student Awards Night in November 2003.

ChallengesThe two key organisers were keen to see

the program continue, but this decision is outside their influence. Funding for the ATSI Youth Project Officer position finishes

in the near future, and its continuation is not certain. One informant noted that a permanent cross-council position would make things easier to fit the DET district pattern, but that so long as there was commitment by at least one person in the council and DET, the program could continue. Ideally, it is hoped that individual schools will adopt the program and mainstream it within their activities.

ConclusionThese case studies highlight many of the

key issues facing young Indigenous people today – employment opportunities, cultural identity, family and community relationships, and leadership renewal. Each project has assisted the young people involved to become more positively engaged within their own communities, by encouraging participation by community elders and other community members. There have also been stronger links forged with the non-Indigenous community – employers, community service providers, police, the arts community, and many government departments. Common threads in the projects are: the acknowledgment and acceptance of Indigenous values and practices; embedding activities for young people within wider community activities; partnerships within and between the Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities; and the importance of committed staff acknowledged within the Indigenous community.

IntroductionFor more than a decade governments of

all persuasions have been talking about a “whole-of-government” approach to service delivery which accounts for the holistic needs of the community. Such an approach, it is argued, provides what people need more efficiently and effectively by focusing on the whole person, and reducing duplication between services. Local governments have tackled this issue in a variety of ways and the following case studies include: a complex collaboration between council, state government departments and other community organisations to deliver youth services; a collaboration between council and non-government organisations which links council youth governance structures to the design and delivery of youth services; and a council web site which acts as a directory of youth services and as a forum for young peoples’ views.

Frontyard Youth Services – Melbourne City Council

Frontyard Youth Services provides a one-stop free service for young people aged between 12–25. It is located in Melbourne’s Central Business District and targets those young people most in need of housing, legal, employment and income security support. Unemployment is highest in the 15 to 17-year-old group where it is almost 25 per cent. In inner Melbourne 15.6 per cent of young people are unemployed compared to 4.7 per cent of 25 to 34-year-olds. In addition to Melbourne’s resident population, nearly half a million young people visit the city each week. It is estimated that between 1 000 and 4 500 people are homeless at any one time in Melbourne. The majority are under 34 years of age and had left home by 19.

8Service delivery through the “0ne-stop-shop”


History of the initiativeSince the mid 1990s Frontyard Youth

Services has offered support to young people who are homeless or in need. However the concept of a one-stop youth service organisation has evolved over the past 20 years with various youth services having been supported by the Melbourne City Council to provide a range of support programs to young people. For example, in 1988 the Melbourne Citymission established the Information Deli at the Flinders Street Railway Station to provide information and support to young people. Earlier an information centre had been established in the City Square. Melbourne City Council had also provided funding for the Melbourne Youth Service which co-located with the Department of Employment, Education and Training’s Youth Access Centre.

These attempts at establishing youth services were given impetus by regular critical incidents in the Melbourne Central Business District and ongoing reporting of youth problems in the media. Like many capital cities, Melbourne attracts large numbers of young people who are transient and homeless. In addition, many young people travel to Melbourne from adjacent suburbs for support services which are often centralised. The present location of the service is Frontyard’s third site.

The projectFrontyard offers the biggest service centre

of its type in Melbourne’s Central Business District. It provides a site for a range of youth services to be offered free and in one accessible location. This allows young people to access accommodation support, computer and information access, dental, employment and training, family reconciliation, health, income support and legal advice.

Frontyard involves a collaboration between the City of Melbourne, the Victorian Department of Human Services, Melbourne Citymission and a range of youth service organisations. In addition, each of these organisations brings diverse sponsorship and funding sources to the Frontyard partnership. Melbourne Citymission performs a lead agency function and also provides direct client services to young people. The City of Melbourne provides funds to Melbourne Citymission for the positions of Frontyard manager, a reception youth worker and administrative support.

The general objective of the various member agencies is to “work together to address the physical, emotional and social needs of young people aged up to 25 years”. The collaborative venture allows Frontyard to be a “recognised, respected and successful provider and serviced system navigator for young people at risk within the Centre Business District”.

Frontyard articulates its core values as:

• positive client and provider outcomes;

• collaboration and cooperation;

• client empowerment and self-determination;

• prevention and early intervention;

• accountability and transparency;

• dedication, cooperation and effort of all staff; and

• community participation and responsibility.

Each of the service organisations have their own objectives, core values and target groups. However the target groups of Frontyard are identified as “12–25-year-olds, homeless, at risk, in need and those either living or using the Melbourne Central Business District”.

89

According to Frontyard policy documents, the term “at risk” includes, but is not limited to, young people experiencing or potentially experiencing: homelessness; family breakdown; early school leaving; abuse – physical, substance, emotional or sexual; mental health problems; and social isolation.

Services operating under the umbrella of Frontyard include:

• Centrelink, which makes available its officers at particular times during the week, assisting young people (up to 25 years) to understand, claim and keep income support payments as well as providing referrals to Centrelink special-ist services.

• Melbourne Gateway Reconnect, which offers support and advocacy to young people (12–18 years) and their families living, working or attending school in or around the Central Business District. This program aims to assist young people who have left home early or helps young people and their families get back together.

• Melbourne Youth Support Service, which is an accommodation, information and referral service for young people (15–25 years). It offers face-to-face and telephone support, assisting with crisis and medium to long-term accom-modation, legal issues, assistance with drug and alcohol problems, health, food and material aid, and training and employment.

• The functions of the Victorian ombuds-man, who will investigate complaints concerning administrative actions taken by any government department, public statutory body or officers or employees of any municipality to which the Act applies.

• Young People’s Health Service, which provides nurses, doctors and coun-sellors to young people (12–22 years) in relation to sexual health, drug and alcohol, emotional wellbeing, vaccina-tions, blood tests, pregnancy, and other health needs.

• People’s Sexual Health Clinic, which deals with a wide range of sexual health and relationship issues faced by young people (12–25 years). The clinic provides sexual health check-ups, contraception and condoms, vaccination, Hepatitis and HIV testing, information about sex-uality, pregnancy, sexually transmitted infections, family problems and sexual abuse.

• Youthlaw, which provides free legal advice and casework to young people (up to 25 years). It also involves itself in advocacy around issues to do with young people and the law and offers education programs relating to young people.

• Youthnet, which offers young people (12–25 years) free two-hour access to the latest computer software. Six com-puters provide Internet access and the means for young people to surf, create resumés, email, chat online, scan, build web pages, play games and look for work and accommodation.

Frontyard is also unique in terms of its management. It is not a community-based or managed agency. Rather it is governed through a complex set of relationships between a range of stakeholders. These include the co-located services and each of the groups that support them. Each service is funded by a number of government, private and non-government groups and managed in different ways. In addition, Frontyard, as the umbrella, has a strategic alliance with three key groups, the Melbourne Citymission,

Chapter 8Service delivery through the “one-stop-shop”


which acts as an auspicing body, the Department of Human Service, which has a special interest as it funds many of the co-located services and the Melbourne City Council, which funds the key operational functions (called the Frontyard Direct Service Delivery Operating Platform) to the tune of over $300 000.

The governing of Frontyard involves three levels of management – service staff, service managers, and strategic alliance partners. Each fortnight all staff of all co-located services are invited to attend a meeting where a variety of issues are raised. Each month managers of the co-located groups attend a service management meeting. Each quarter representatives of Frontyard’s funding bodies meet with the manager to discuss co-location issues and the future development of the organisation. The manager attends all three sets of meetings.

ParticipationWhen asked about Frontyard’s mechanisms

for engaging with young people the manager stated that the organisation itself did not and could not rely on formal youth governance methods such as youth advisory groups or youth councils. These mechanisms have proved unsuccessful with most groups of young people, particularly those who use Frontyard. Many of these young people are in crisis and hence are not equipped to sit on such structures. However, at least one of the co-located services has a number of young people sitting on its management committee.

However, the manager did stress that Frontyard, as the hosting organisation, and the co-located services are all committed to principles and methods that allow young people to shape service delivery practice and foster collaboration. For example, Frontyard

plans to frame policy ideals in positive terms and have young people write down what this means in their own words. The way that young people articulate these ideals can be used in publicly visible signage and other forms of communication.

According to the manager, the existence of a formal youth committee is less important than youth services that allow young people to be publicly visible and that give them rights to access to space and place. Seeing young people has a profound impact on the way policies are formed and practice gets carried out. In addition, giving young people a place to come together, meet and communicate is a critical ingredient in encouraging them to shape the world around them. The Youthnet project is one example of this with young people being able to meet and communicate through their Internet connections.

AchievementsThe redevelopment of Frontyard Youth

Services has resulted in increases in both the number of young people supported and the breadth of services offered in the Melbourne inner city area. Over the past twelve months the number of contacts made with young people using the co-located services has increased substantially.

According to both Frontyard staff and Melbourne City Council representatives, an important achievement of Frontyard has been its ability to bring together a varied group of organisations and provide a diverse range of services to young people. Frontyard has been able to target and attract young people with some of the most demanding of needs and issues. This demonstrates that it is possible to offer multiple services in a coordinated and cooperative way despite these acknowledged difficulties. As one informant said:

91

Frontyard is now a living and practical illustration that local governments can get involved in services that offer something to the most needy. Eighteen months ago it was a pipe dream. Now the aspiration of offering a range of things to a range of young people has been realised.

According to a number of people consulted, another strength of Frontyard is that it has managed to establish ways of managing critical incidents without resorting to the exclusion or banning of individual young people. This has been achieved by staff establishing a common set of principles for guiding the management of young people who breach acceptable standards of behaviour. Important in this regard has been a commitment to maintaining the safety of workers and young people, not diminishing or dismissing young people and building on the strengths and talents of young people.

Initially this has been possible because of the shared goodwill of those involved. Despite the many differences that might exist most maintain a solid commitment to improve the circumstances of young people who are experiencing social and personal problems. The perception that large numbers of young people have profound needs appears to bring about considerable solidarity of purpose amongst organisations and staff. In other words, the extent of the problem facing young people is a significant motivating factor that prompts people to work together and, during times of difference or tension, allows people to identify mutual points of interest.

Another important element in Frontyard’s success is the degree of financial and professional support offered by Melbourne City Council. Council staff are involved in a range of different ways in Frontyard’s operations. Some service the organisation

by facilitating the funding and accounting of funds. Others are involved in the management of co-located services offering support and advice on policy matters or are members of the organisation’s strategic alliance group and make representations to other funding bodies. According to one person, it has been important that there is something of a formal distance between council and direct service provision. This has allowed Frontyard to carry out work with young people who may be seen by some in the community as too risky, dangerous or personally undeserving.

ChallengesOne of the major challenges confronting

Frontyard is to maintain shared cooperation. This can be particularly difficult given that Frontyard is essentially a coalition between very different organisations, often coming from different professional orientations, with slightly different mandates, target groups, organisational structures and external constraints. It can also be difficult because of the different relationships service groups can have with young people. For example, there may be a substantial conflict of interest if one service group is representing a young person who feels aggrieved by another. It is conceivable that a young person may ask for the assistance of the legal service or the ombudsman because they have a problem with Centrelink.

Another challenge facing an organisation like Frontyard is moving beyond the initial goodwill expressed by all the players so that processes are clearly articulated and agreed. As one person said, youth services can operate well for a limited period because people share a general commitment to the wellbeing of young people. However, this will rarely sustain productive relationships, particularly when inevitably conflict,



management challenges or differences of practice or style appear.

The challenge then for Frontyard is to set in place formal agreements, clearly articulated management processes and mechanisms for dealing with conflict or difficulties. The manager was adamant that for this to happen the organisation must capitalise on goodwill, achieve some practical and publicly visible outcomes, use part of this time to come to agreements or protocols, secure long-term and safe funding and consolidate in a stable location.

Onkaparinga Youth Development Model, Onkaparinga City Council

The Youth Development Model is an initiative of the Onkaparinga City Council, which covers a large geographical area to the south of Adelaide, South Australia, including the southern beach suburbs, some Adelaide hills suburbs and parts of the McLaren Vale wine region. The Youth Development Model is a framework for the provision of a broad range of services targeted at young people aged between 12 and 25 years of age.

History of the initiativeThe Youth Development Model initiative

came from a desire to consolidate the youth services Onkaparinga City Council had inherited from its inception at the amalgamation of three smaller local governments in the 1990s. Each of the original councils had run their own youth programs. These programs consisted of youth work/street work services, community development programs and a “youth events” program. After amalgamation it was decided to consolidate the existing youth services into a new model to deal more effectively with the issues for young people in the area.

A period of consultation prior to 1999 with key stakeholders, community development workers and representatives of young people, found the primary issues for young people in Onkaparinga were: homelessness; truancy; lack of affordable accommodation; poor public transport and lack of alternative forms of transport; issues related to low self-esteem; a lack of male role models in sole parent families; and high youth unemployment.

A model to address the issues identified by the consultation process was developed in partnership with Mission Australia who were given the task of implementing a pilot program in 1999. The Youth Development Model was formally implemented in 2000 with Mission Australia awarded a three-year contract to 2003 as the service provider. This contract was subsequently rolled over to 2005. The Council intends to review the contract in 2005 before tendering again.

The development of the project was described by the community workers at Onkaparinga City Council as being “evidence based” and predicated on building a partnership with a community service provider, Mission Australia, rather than direct service delivery by the Onkaparinga City Council. Mission Australia must report to the council quarterly and its contract is monitored by a consultative process with a team of highly qualified community development workers employed by the council.

The Youth Development Model aims to build community capacity and empower youth through a strategic approach. Services to young people are to be maximised by producing long-term, sustainable outcomes through the regional planning and allocation of resources. The model runs programs based on the local needs of young people

93

in regions within the boundaries of Onkaparinga City Council, as defined by a consultation process. Engagement with young people and their active participation in the development of programs and their implementation processes is integral to the model.

Programs provided include “speak out” sessions for young people, regional youth forums, the Onkaparinga Youth Council and “VOLT” or Vocational Opportunities Leadership Training, an Aboriginal Youth Action Committee and regional youth sector forums for community workers. The council has essentially continued to run the street work, community development and youth event programs for the young people that existed before amalgamation along with additional services but within a new consultative model.

In this context the Onkaparinga Youth Council is intended to give young people a forum where they can raise issues of interest to them. Young people are also represented on the reference group of VOLT and other programs. The VOLT reference group includes representatives of the youth sector and local business people and is intended to help young people in Onkaparinga develop employment skills and to help them establish business enterprises.

Young people were originally recruited to the Onkaparinga Youth Council by an advertisement and interview selection processes based on the applicant’s knowledge of local and state issues and how she or he would address these issues. This was an expensive and time consuming process and representatives for the youth council and similar forums are now selected through a network of young people involved in the programs.

The modelThe key objective of the Youth Development

Model is to support young people in the Onkaparinga council area and encourage their participation and engagement in the design and delivery of youth services. Support is not given by direct service but through partnerships, principally with Mission Australia.

The partnership is formalised in a “partnering charter” and council-employed community development workers meet regularly with Mission Australia to discuss the implementation of the contract. This process was described by the community development workers as a “dialogue with a partner” and not an arrangement to control the activities of Mission Australia. The council was into “contract improvement” rather than “best practice”, which was redolent of economic rationalism, and it was stressed that Mission Australia had been given the contract because their community development philosophy fitted well with that of the council. Onkaparinga community development workers said the partnership was working well and the consultative processes were in place and effective.

StakeholdersWhilst happy with the way the partnership

with Mission Australia was working, the community development workers at Onkaparinga City Council had found that partnership arrangements demanded considerable time and effort from themselves and their business partners. A community development approach required the council and partners to share similar values and meant time had to be taken to establish common ground. Work on relationship building is often part of the invisible, and difficult to measure part of community development work.



In addition to Mission Australia, the community development workers saw the council as in a broadly defined partnership with a diverse group of stakeholders. Partners in the broad sense included the Southern Youth Network, Centrelink, Shine SA, Second Story, the VOLT program, the Salvation Army, the Baptists, the Christian Brothers and Neparandi.

More formally the community development workers saw the council as being in alliance with the Department of Human Services, Family and Youth Services and the Department of Education and Children’s Services to provide outcomes for young people in the southern regions of Adelaide.

AchievementsThe community development workers

at Onkaparinga City Council believed the success of their partnership with Mission Australia was reflected in the high number of young people participating in their programs. In the last twelve months 11 500 young people had taken part in activities delivered by the council’s partners.

The model’s success was founded on strategic planning to ensure services were integrated with participation principles and to ensure that resources were pooled so there was no duplication of services. Council workers said the model was not fragile, it had solid foundations and pointed to the length of the contract offered to Mission Australia. This was held as evidence of the council’s long-term commitment to the model and to delivering services to young people in Onkaparinga.

Other achievements included the development of effective working relations between the council and Neparandi, a community-based Aboriginal social action group, the development of a youth Internet

web site and a film project with Aboriginal young people. Those interviewed said that there was strong interest from other local governments in the Youth Development Model. The mayors of the City of Salisbury and the City of Alexandria and representatives of the City of West Torrens and Adelaide Hills councils had visited them to discuss the model. There had also been inquiries from local government representatives in Queensland and Western Australia. In fact, external interest has grown so much that community development workers had to devote significant amounts of time to dealing with inquiries from other councils.

What is interesting about the Youth Development Model is the way in which community development principles appear to have been successfully integrated with a business partnership model in the outsourcing of services to young people by the Onkaparinga City Council. Community development workers pointed to the importance of forming an alliance with an organisation with a similar value base as integral to successful partnering, in this case Mission Australia.

From the community development worker’s perspective the strong emphasis on con-sultation with stakeholders and participation by the client group in the design and delivery of services helps to explain the model’s success. Other factors for the success of the model may include a long-standing culture of social cooperation in the Onkaparinga region where it is common for even politicians from opposing political parties to work together for “the good of the South”.

The model’s perceived success, forward planning by the Onkaparinga community development team and partners, and continuing long-term support from the Onkaparinga City Council indicate that it will

95

continue to be implemented and evolve. As such the Onkaparinga City Council’s Youth Development Model may continue to provide an interesting example of a successful partnership between local government, NGOs, community organisations and business interests.

ChallengesAlthough the Youth Development Model

was viewed as a council asset and a positive contribution to the community, the community development workers consulted pointed to some continuing issues for young people in Onkaparinga that need to be addressed.

More accessible information about the model is necessary so that more young people know about the programs it offers. Some young people in Onkaparinga perceive local councils to be remote, bureaucratic institutions that do not support their needs. Unless information about the model and the way in which it is engaging young people is available to them through media they regularly access, these views remain unchallenged.

Moreover, it is important to engage more with young people who face barriers to participation from being homeless or without transport to localities where activities take place. It is these young people, in particular, who pose challenges for service providers and practitioners, because of the multiple disadvantages they frequently face.

Spinach web site – Adelaide City Council

The Spinach web site was established and is maintained by the Adelaide City Council. The council’s local government area covers the Adelaide central business district, the residential district of North Adelaide,

the clubs and pubs of Hindley Street and the Rundle Street café zone. Adelaide’s parklands ring the city and its downtown area attracts many young people from other parts of the metropolitan area looking for entertainment.

There are also three University campuses (Adelaide University, and UniSA City West and UniSA City East), two TAFE colleges and one public and five private high schools located within one kilometre of each other and clustered around Adelaide’s North Terrace. Approximately 48 000 young people study within the square mile of South Adelaide. A significant number of other young people sleep rough in Adelaide’s parklands or sleep in night shelters in the inner city.

History of the initiativeThe Spinach web site was a response to

consultations with young people and youth workers by the Adelaide City Council in early 2000. The council planned to produce a youth newsletter to keep young people informed about its activities. But after consultations the council decided to opt for a young people’s web site instead.

A second round of consultations were then held with young people, youth workers and representatives of youth service organi-sations in Adelaide City Council area to see what they would like to see included on the Spinach web site. The name “Spinach” was chosen because, as young people told the council, “spinach is good for you”.

The Adelaide City Council came to see Spinach as a way of encouraging the participation of young people in the activities of the council. The site would be a forum which would provide ways for young people to comment on what they found interesting about council services and activities and what they did not.



The projectThe Adelaide City Council hosts Spinach

internally. It is a branch of the Adelaide City Council Information Technology Department. Spinach exists in cyberspace and its non-staff assets consist of the server it runs on and community goodwill. Spinach is fully funded by the Adelaide City Council. In the past there was a partnership arrangement with Bank SA but this is no longer the case. A small team of professionals employed by the council runs Spinach. The team consists of:

• a project manager;

• a web designer;

• a graphic design team; and

• volunteers from TAFE.

The project manager has professional qualifications as does the web designer. The graphic design team have TAFE qualifications and are assisted by volunteers studying at TAFE. In addition, a significant number of IT volunteers work on Spinach.

The Spinach web site (www.spinach.org.au) has been designed to appeal visually to young people between the ages of 12–25 (although people younger and older are known to visit the site). It is deep green, with a groovy musical introduction. The home page has buttons which link users to “What’s on”, “Speak up”, “Recreation”, “About Council”, “City Help”, “Participate”, “Gallery” and “Competitions”. People can take part in online voting polls, and the latest daily poll we saw was on “Should the voting age be lowered to 16?” Interestingly, only 36 per cent of participants thought it should, with 60 per cent opposed!

Spinach Forums invite young people to have their say on a number of different topics. Clicking on “Events and competitions” give people information on what’s on, and

an opportunity to say what they thought of events. Another section on “Need a hand in the city?” is complemented by “Where’s good to get help?” “Spinach Scribbles” allows young people to write about “What’s bugging you lately?”

In “Destination Adelaide”, a site targeting newcomers to the city, young people can access information on:

• housing and living independently;

• employment;

• city safety issues;

• navigating the city;

• home sickness;

• health care and other services; and

• budgeting.

The site has changed in recent years in response to changes in web technology. It now runs more online polls and forums to engage with its users. Advances in navigation and new levels of graphic design have been incorporated into the site to keep it up to date.

The site also trials ideas put forward by young people. For example, it had a music section for a while called “Music House”. After some time, it was found to be duplicating the services of other sites that were solely devoted to music and was dropped after consultation with young users of the site. Similarly an experimental site set up to post poetry by young people was dropped after consultations revealed that visitors to the site did not click on the poetry section frequently.

ParticipationThe Spinach project seeks to engage young

people with the activities of the council and provide a forum for their views on council services and wider concerns. Spinach is

97

advised by a Youth Advisory Committee called YOUNG VOICES, which is a joint initiative of the Adelaide City Council and the Youth Affairs Council of South Australia (YACSA). Young people from YACSA’s Youth Participation and Action Group (YPAG) provide advice and feedback on council related issues, including Spinach. According to the web site there are almost 100 young people involved in the VOICES project.

Spinach is also linked with a network of youth workers – the Central Workers with Youth Action Network (CWYAN) who provide feedback and take part in consultations. Moreover, Spinach is connected to the Young Ambassadors network; young people who live, work or study in the city and promote Adelaide, and with international students studying in South Australia.

Apart from these formal networks, the web site provides a range of informal mechanisms for participation. Anonymous feedback from young people is received continuously through polls and forums on the site, which can take place at any time of the day or night. Anyone who leaves an email address is replied to and all queries followed up. Other groups of young people are involved through promotions, events and competition pages on the web site, online forums and polls. Recreation and sporting groups involving young people also have input through consultations with the Spinach project team.

AchievementsSpinach receives 4 500 hits per week and

the rate has increased 300 per cent over the last twelve months. This suggests that the site is reaching at least some of its target group, assisted by the active involvement of young people who have advised on the site and its contents. The combination of

content – comprehensive youth services, sport and entertainment, and participatory forums – seems to be working well.

According to the project team young people have developed ownership over Spinach since its inception because they are the ones driving it. The team acknowledged the importance of keeping the needs of its client group at the forefront of all of their operations.

Team members were adamant that in consultations with young people it was important not to set up expectations that cannot be met. There are not enough resources to meet the needs of everyone, so Spinach seeks to create the opportunities for young people to contribute, and where possible to implement those suggestions. This was obviously a delicate balancing act. Limited resources means that it is not simply a case of responding to all requests, but negotiating with their young stakeholders about what can realistically be achieved.

Spinach was the first web site of its kind in Australia and has won a best practice award. It has also attracted the attention of local government elsewhere in Australia and the project team has been invited to advise other councils on the construction and content of their own sites.

As a fully owned and operated council project Spinach is free of commercial pressures, which gives the team considerable creative freedom, whilst providing a public medium for the young people of Adelaide to comment, give feedback on and influence Adelaide City Council policies.

ChallengesThe immediate challenge facing Spinach

is to make it more accessible for those young people less likely to visit the site. Currently, it does not cater for young people



on the basis of specific social categories such as gender, class, ethnicity or other circumstances. This means that some young people miss out, for example, simply because they do not have Internet access (or any computer access). Adelaide City Council is attempting to address this issue by providing some open access computers in its city offices, and has had some success with street kids apparently beginning to use this service. The intimidating nature of many council buildings throughout Australia will continue to inhibit their easy use by young people, however.

The team was also conscious that Spinach was ratepayer-funded, which required both financial caution and additional ethical responsibilities. There was a danger of being unable to make reasonable efforts to implement the suggestions of stakeholders. Like other publicly-funded services, it has to tread a fine line between servicing the needs of its very broad client group, without alienating its funding sources – local citizens.

ConclusionThese case studies illustrate the innovative

models of youth service developed by local

governments to better service the myriad needs of young people. For Melbourne City Council this has meant a complex collaboration with a variety of partners in the government and non-government sector, with council maintaining some distance from direct service provision. For Onkaparinga, it has involved a long-standing relationship with a single non-government provider, with a more “hands-on” scrutiny by council community development workers of services provided. Both projects have involved sophisticated negotiations over agendas, philosophies and approaches to young people.

Each of the three projects take the issue of participation by young people very seriously, but have different approaches to their inclusion. Melbourne City Council youth workers have highlighted the importance of making young people publicly visible in policy and practice, and regard formal governance mechanisms as less appropriate for their clientele. Both Onkaparinga and Adelaide City Councils, on the other hand, have encouraged close links between their formal youth governance structures and their service provision. The apparent success of each project indicates there are many paths to inclusion.

This research has offered an overview of youth services provided by local government throughout Australia, and some detailed case studies of programs identified by councils as innovative. In this chapter we attempt to identify quality youth practice in local government by drawing upon this work and the growing scholarly literature. The chapter begins with a typology of local government youth practice and then moves to an analysis of participatory mechanisms designed to engage young people with local government. Impediments to the participation of young people are identified, as well as ingredients for good practice. We conclude with principles and practices for quality local government youth practice.

Towards a typology of local government youth practice

The evidence from this research is there is actually much diversity amongst those who support local government youth practice.

Different local authorities people have different reasons for encouraging young people’s participation. Some directly offer specialist services to young people while others choose to support general community initiatives. Others put considerable energy into creating youth policy statements and plans in contrast to those who consciously avoid tying down council commitment or limiting to set policy imperatives. To better understand this diversity the report will discuss some of this diversity in relation to philosophy, the groups targeted for attention, rationale and methods, collaboration, levels of youth participation and focus.

PhilosophyThere have been many ways of

conceptualising the differences in youth practice. Some have noted the different ideological persuasions, philosophies and values shaping different approaches to youth practice (Thorpe 1985; Cooper &

9Youth practice in local government


White 1994; White 1990; Van Moorst 1983). Implicit is the idea that philosophies offer their supporters forceful and, on the face of it, coherent explanations for social problems and a blue-print for action and youth work is often more concerned with the transmission of values than particular ends (Maunders 1990, p. 43).

There was evidence from this research of diversity in philosophy amongst workers. Some saw their role as managing youth crisis and anti-social behaviour, others to mediate on behalf of the disadvantaged, some to steer the dysfunctional back on the “straight and narrow”, while others saw themselves as advocates for young people. While some held articulate, reflexive views of youth work practice and their roles in it, many did not.

Target groupsAnother important dimension in

understanding variety in youth practice is the different kinds of groups targeted for attention. Many councils targeted particular age groups, covering mainly the 12 to 25 age groups. Others targeted according to self or social identity so that specific sub-categories of youth, such as “at-risk youth”, “Aboriginal youth”, “ethnic youth”, or “local youth groups” were the focus. In Cairns young “people of the Pacific” were the target of the “About Jobs” program, and groups of “taggers” became the focus of the Kwinana Youth Arts program. Other councils, in an attempt to support others who may be directly involved in work with young people, target community groups or established organisations. Sometimes this involves councils offering funding or in-kind resources, setting up meetings, undertaking policy work, coordinating the work of disparate groups or helping others plan for the future.

Many local governments were insistent, however, that their programs, services and activities are available to all young people living within their geographical area. Programs were described as inclusive, with sometimes very general descriptions of groups of young people involved. This seems to be despite the fact that many youth workers see their key role as servicing disadvantaged young people or those in most need. It is also despite the fact that in most instances resources alone prohibit local government offering their programs to all young people.

Rationale and methodsAnother kind of typology of youth practice

involves categorising the different rationales and methods organisations use to achieve outcomes (Bessant and Webber 1999; Jeffs and Smith 1987; White 2002). Tensions exist, for example, within local government between those who subscribe to a structural efficiency model of reform and those who advocate a local democracy model of reform (Aulich 1999).

Most of the youth services staff interviewed did not articulate their understandings of these models in this manner, but spoke of the differences between how they, as workers, operated and the approaches of other levels, such as managers and elected members, in their organisations. These findings are similar to other work which has illustrated variations between and within local governments on appropriate models of community service provision (Saggers et al. 2003).

Collaboration and diversityLocal government youth practice can

involve collaborating with others from many different work situations including

101

government or non-government agencies, paid or unpaid work, secure agency funding and job positions or short-term funding arrangements and job contracts. Many of our case studies, such as the PALS program in Campbelltown and “About Jobs” in Cairns, involved significant collaboration between intersectoral stakeholders, and paid and voluntary staff.

In addition, the location of youth services are markedly different with some organisations based in metropolitan areas, some in rural and regional areas, and some in clubs, centres and offices. Organisations vary in size and structure, from small to medium sized local groups to large church organisations and government run hostels. Increasingly youth services, such as the Onkaparinga Youth Development Model, are being contracted out to private and for profit companies as well as larger charitable groups (see Hall 1993 for a discussion of the different kinds of relationships local governments have with other groups).

FocusA review of the case studies reveals

differences in the focus of projects. Melbourne’s Frontyard, Onkaparinga’s Youth Development Model and Hornsby Youth Services represent projects that first and foremost offer a service to young people. Some of the services operating out of Frontyard, such as the State Ombudsman and Youthlaw, principally focused on representation and advocacy of young people. Service programs are more inclined to target those identified as most in need or disadvantaged. In contrast the Moonah group, “About Jobs” and the PALS program appear to be strongly influenced by local networks with an emphasis on family, community and leadership.

Many councils have or are establishing a formal youth policy statement or strategy which articulates where they will direct their attention in relation to young people. Virtually all councils, such as Dorset Council’s FEWCHA, had attempted the establishment of formal youth governance structures such as youth advisory groups or councils. Others included less formal means of governance. In its support of the GRIND Youth Newspaper Darwin City Council adopted an approach that saw youth practitioners mentoring, modelling and offering guidance. The Palmerston Library Young Adult Program and the “About Jobs” initiative concentrated much of their attention on training and educating young people, particularly so they might be better prepared for the labour market. In many cases this involves offering organised activities and leisure options to young people, such as the Moonah and KAMELEON projects.

The Palmerston Public Space Protocol was first and foremost an exercise in consulting and building agreements between young people and other community stakeholders. Both the Messenger/Dreaming project and the Kwinana Arts program in Western Australia involved community education and social action, using cultural development and arts work as tools. Arguably many of the projects involved an element of management and regulation of youth issues and young people’s behaviour. This was particularly so in the Northern Midlands Police Caution project and the Palmerston Public Space Protocol.

Youth participation and local government

The thread running through almost all of the various youth programs visited is a strong emphasis on youth participation, either formal governance structures or other informal attempts to involve young people in community life. This should come as no

Chapter 9Youth practice in local government


surprise as youth councils and other formal youth participatory initiatives are not new, as we have discussed earlier.

Between the late 1970s until International Youth Year in 1985 many groups and organisations promoted the benefits of youth participation and the encouragement of young people in decision-making processes (Maunders 1990; Bessant, Sercombe and Watts 1998). The popularity of youth participation waned considerably during the 1990s however, but in the past five years it has re-emerged, this time with active government promotion of young people in civic life, community and governance (Wierenga 2003, p. 9). This follows similar trends in other western countries (Matthews 2001).

Local government as a venue for youth participation

Arguably local government is an ideal setting from which to engage in youth participatory practice as the most local of governmental jurisdictions in the Australian political system (Kiss 2003). Particularly in the past twenty years local governments have faced increasing pressures, from within their constituencies and from other layers of government, to increase their provision of human services. Indeed every Local Government Act contains important references to the local government/community nexus (Kiss 2003, p. 103). As a consequence young people, as one of the key constituencies of local government, have become one of the core groups local government are bound to engage with.

Relative to other organisations, local government have a strong resource base, able to draw on a local rates base as well as commonwealth and state grants. In addition, and partly as a consequence, local

governments often have large and established infrastructure, capital and other assets from which to draw. These resources can be and are more easily mobilised by youth initiatives that are affiliated with local government. One effect of this is that career structures, supervisory support and conditions for those working with young people can be significantly better in local government than in other parts of the community services industry. As one youth development worker who had previously worked in not-for-profit organisations noted:

there is so much more institutional support for youth workers in local government . . . I have much more security of tenure . . . there are much clearer lines of management and responsibility . . . I get plenty of professional development and support for furthering my education and skills . . . if I have a problem there are others I can consult . . . and most importantly there are allies for young people who, when they decide to support you, offer tremendous institutional and community clout . . . all this means that I can plan, know with confidence what I can achieve and expect . . . some say government can be slow and constraining but it can also be liberating if you’ve worked in the community sector.

Local government can also be a helpful location from which to launch youth participatory work because of the many partnerships and collaborative relationships that routinely occur in and around councils. Often local members have a vast network of strategic affiliations with local business, interest groups, churches, schools and neighbourhoods. This means that council becomes a physical and political centre around which human and social capital gathers. Establishing events, forums and facilities that see young people come into

103

this context often provides opportunities for them to engage in civic building. For example, much of the success of the GRIND group is attributed to the many unexpected associations that have been built as a consequence of the group being physically located in the Darwin City Council’s offices. As the youth development officer said, “if GRIND wasn’t here (in the council building) there is no way that young people would have got access to so many leading community and business people”.

What are youth participatory approaches?

Although the approaches used to encourage youth participation vary there were some common features encountered among local governments. Most with whom we spoke drew upon methods informed by what in the development studies literature is conceptualised as Participatory Learning Analysis (PLA) and/or Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA). These methods are prompted by claims that top-down development or governance have serious shortcomings. The view is that externally imposed and expert-driven forms of policy and community governance have become ineffective, particularly for those groups (such as young people) who traditionally have poor access to decision-making (Cooke and Kothari 2001, p. 5).

The central motivator of those adopting this method is to allow “the people”, particularly those who otherwise are marginal to governance, to become paramount in any attempts to plan and manage things that affect them. Implicit in this work is the supposition that the knowledge and active involvement of “the people” will transform planning and lead to improved outcomes (Mosse 2001, p. 16).

These methods are characterised by:• a heavy reliance on “simply talking”

(and where necessary interpreters);• adequate time given for talking;• the use of visual communication tools

in conjunction with discussion and conversations (such as photo stories);

• the reliance on local concepts, tradi-tions, ideas and knowledge;

• the use of art and other cultural production to express and articulate young people’s ideas (such as paintings and drawings);

• the use of narrative or story;• the use of spatial and temporal map-

ping and modelling exercises (including ground maps);

• time spent in context and on country;• the sharing of information between

people in a community; and• collaboration with young people “talk-

ing up” with the backing and support of the old people (Abbott et al. 1998; Chamber 1994; Walsh & Mitchell 2002).

These ideas are proving popular amongst youth practitioners because it can be difficult to engage young people in meaningful ways in planning and governmental processes, the relevance of which is often not immediately obvious to many of them. They may have difficulty understanding what it is that policy makers and leaders are doing and what they might be after. They may also have trouble articulating their experiences or engaging in research exchanges that are dominated by adult “talk” or discussions (Bessant et al. 1998).

Hence, many youth practitioners draw heavily upon participatory research and community cultural development traditions (Walsh & Mitchell 2002; Chambers 1994; Bessant et al. 1998; Perlstein & Bliss 1994).



These traditions rely on the use of a suite of tools that allow young people to engage in arts and cultural production, fun and innovative activities as a means of generating insights, experiences and knowledge. This practice style is often predicated on the view that young people’s expression, mastery and communication through the arts is a powerful way of encouraging young people to articulate their cultural values and bring deeper meanings of their experiences to the public arena (Adams & Goldard 2001).

Levels of youth participationYouth participation can be thought of

as operating at different levels along a continuum (Westhorp 1987; Holdsworthy 1992, p. 15). This continuum begins with attempts by practitioners to have young people communicate their ideas through ad hoc input and structured consultation, through to more formal means of guaranteeing young people’s input and control. Others have suggested that youth practice can range from situations where adults are in full control of youth programs and make no effort to change this, to encouraging young people’s passive involvement, to consulting young people, to building partnerships with significant collaboration between young people and adults, through to situations where young people become self-mobilising and autonomous (de Kort cited by Holdsworthy 2001).

So this can mean youth participation is used to describe young people simply attending some kind of event or activity. For example, during the initial events carried out by the Palmerston Public Library there was concern at the lack of young people attending. Participation can also mean speaking with young people without taking particular note of what they have to say. Some of those consulted claimed that youth advisory

councils can fall into this category. In other instances it can mean young people taking on responsibility for the planning, managing and execution of initiatives that are important to them. The GRIND group and the Kwinana theatre company are perhaps examples of this form of youth participation.

Youth participation can also involve young people engaging in full civic life, enjoying similar civic rights and obligations to others, voting in local elections, petitioning officials, enjoying access to public space in the same way that others do. While we saw evidence of some young people enjoying elements of this kind of participation it was more common to have such participation enshrined in policy.

Reasons for participationMany of those consulted had the view

that there are considerable benefits, both to young people, communities and local governments in adopting youth participatory approaches. Some, such as those involved in the Palmerston Public Space Project thought that youth participation could help guard against youth alienation or deal with youth problems. Others, such as those in the “About Jobs” and GRIND projects saw it as a helpful way to educate and train young people, offering them skills useful in the labour market.

For some, young people have a right and an obligation to participation. Like others in their community young people ought to be included in the life of the polity, shaping decisions and contributing to civic life. Others claimed that senior managers were more inclined to see youth participation as an important element in the efficient and effective management of programs, drawing upon the diverse interests and ideas of the consumers of services. Commonly expressed

105

sentiments in our research and throughout the literature are that participatory approaches:

• can lead to better decisions and outcomes;

• can promote the wellbeing and develop-ment of young people;

• can extend young people’s knowledge of local issues;

• can strengthen a commitment to and understanding of human rights and democracy;

• can protect the interests of young people;

• can develop young people’s skills;

• can be fun and enjoyable;

• can help challenge negative stereotypes about young people;

• can recognise capacities;

• can help break down barriers between people in Indigenous communities;

• can assist as a planning tool for groups locked out of formal consultative pro-cesses, as it unpacks large, complex tasks into smaller, manageable jobs;

• can help build connections between young people and their community;

• is what young people want; and

• is a fundamental human right (Lansdown 2002; Barnett 2003; Australian Youth Foundation 2002; Wierenga 2003; Matthews 2001; Walsh & Mitchell 2002).

Means of participationIt also became clear that there are a range of

ways in which young people can participate. For example, young people involved in the GRIND project participated in research, planning, production, evaluation, peer support, representation and advocacy, policy analysis and development, campaigning and lobbying, management of the paper, use of the media, and speaking in public. In the

case of Spinach, Frontyard and KAMELEON young people’s participation was less public and formal and was expressed more through their involvement with the Internet and other media and the forging of relationships with other young people.

Like the methods articulated in a 1996 study of youth involvement in local government decision-making carried out by the NSW Department of Local Government (Paterson 1999) all the councils involved in this study used many mechanisms to involve young people. These included focus groups, youth meetings/forums on specific issues, online forums and discussion groups, council staff consulting directly with young people, non-ongoing youth committees, self-completed surveys, Youth Week, Youth Councils, council staff consulting indirectly with young people, public meetings on specific issues, and representations to council meetings.

A cautionary noteAlthough youth councils and other formal

structures appear to have been tried by many local authorities, their value needs to be assessed in the context of the above debate about participatory approaches. Like Matthews (2001, p. 299) some reflexive practitioners concluded that many youth councils are flawed and inappropriate participatory devices, often obfuscating the voices and interests of many young people. Others concluded that claims youth councils offer young people opportunities for democratic and civic engagement are exaggerated, a point made also by Bessant (2003). These formal and orchestrated attempts at youth participation were sometimes viewed as a forum for adult decision-makers, keen to demonstrate their youth credentials. A number of informants suggested that there was a risk that reproducing parliamentary type events and



structures can produce cynicism in young people and become the training ground for young people to become non-participants in the future (Matthews 2001, p. 314).

What gets in the way of youth participation?

Research on youth participation, and our own work, has identified a number of features which inhibit the active engagement of young people. Often the structures and processes by which decisions are made have been designed by and for those who have very different interests than young people. This means that the culture of formal governance can be very alienating, unfamiliar, out of reach to many young people and produce or exacerbate barriers such as:

• negative attitudes to and stereotyping of young people;

• lack of clarity and sense of purpose;

• tokenism;

• lack of familiarity in adult decision- making systems;

• lack of trust by adults in the abilities of young people;

• skill deficits in young people;

• cultural and/or religious differences;

• poverty and social disadvantage;

• lack of time and resources;

• problems with sustaining membership and maintaining the involvement of experienced young people;

• “junior politicians” using events as a platform for their individual interests;

• excessive formality;

• relying too heavily on “articulate” young people or students;

• the idea that “young people can do nothing” or the idea that “young people can do everything”;

• lack of knowledge of youth issues by council staff;

• lack of transport options for young people;

• lack of reciprocity; and

• focusing on an agenda that is driven by council staff or members without in-put from young people (NSW Depart-ment of Local Government 1997, p. iv; Australian Youth Foundation 2002, p. 4; Barnett 2003, p. 18–20; NSW Com-mission for Children and Young People 2003; Paterson 1999, p. 45; Wierenga 2003, p. 41).

It is also important to recognise that youth participatory methods can never eliminate the tensions involved in local governance youth practice. As Walsh and Mitchell (2002) remind us, participatory work also brings with it new dilemmas. For example, adopting youth participatory approaches does not resolve questions such as: when to plan and when to act, whether participation is compatible with some cultural lore and custom, to what extent young people take on ownership of an issue, and who bears the cost of planning.

Contacting young people

A number of operational or technical challenges were identified which, while important, do not represent a fundamental threat to youth participatory work. For example, local council workers consistently face a challenge in being able to contact young people (as indeed we did when attempting to interview young participants in programs). While organisations such as schools, churches and other youth groups may provide a source of contact it can still be difficult to involve young people, particularly in the early stages of an initiative.

107

This was certainly a problem that the Palmerston Public Library was confronted with when they began attempting to recruit young people for their Young Adults Program. As a council worker said, “we tried going to the schools, the youth organisations, and even putting ads here in the library . . . initially we got nowhere”.

Maintaining interestA number of people talked about the

challenge of maintaining young people’s interest and participation. Youth can be a difficult time when people are vulnerable to the criticisms of others. For many, it is uncool to be seen involving oneself in local government activities and becoming a good citizen.

Another challenge relates to the transitory nature of youth. As the FEWCHA and KAMELEON projects illustrate, no sooner do young people master the knowledge, skills and abilities necessary to participate well than they move on, or into adulthood and can no longer legitimately claim to represent youth. This means that one of the most important ingredients for youth participation, time, is often in short supply. This is exacerbated by competing demands on young people’s time.

FundingFor many councils securing ongoing and

reliable funding for youth participation is difficult. Global trends towards government expression of communitarian values have meant that presently there are some resources available for youth participation. However, this has not always been the case and indeed may well be short-lived. In a climate of fierce contestation for public funds, “warm and fuzzy” activities like youth participation are sometimes perceived as less important than “bread and butter” issues like education, health and employment.

LanguageA further challenge when working with

young people in local government settings is that the language necessary for commu-nicating with young people is often subtly different from the language used to com-municate with council. In addition, there are differences in communication between youth services staff and council management. This means that much of the skill of youth workers involves interpreting and clarifying what different people are saying. As one member of the Darwin business community said:

. . . a real trick to overcome is the language . . . a lot of what I heard sounded pretty fluffy initially, but then I’m sure a lot of what I said wouldn’t make a lot of sense to some of the kids either.

InclusivityInvolving a diverse number of young people

can be a major challenge. In particular, finding ways to involve Indigenous young people was seen as one of the biggest difficulties facing local governments. Cultural difference, a history of racism and institutional exclusion, language, education, income, transport, as well as a host of social problems facing many Indigenous young people were identified as key reasons why many local council youth initiatives found it difficult to be as inclusive as they would have sought. Indeed these differences were often cited as reasons for focusing more exclusively on these groups, as was the case with the projects in Cairns, Fremantle, Campbelltown and Moreland.

Building confidenceYoung people’s lack of confidence,

particularly in the early stages of an initiative, was identified as a challenge for council staff. This was further magnified when they came into contact with council



conventions that saw their access to space and council facilities limited. Many staff of council youth teams counted as one of their earliest and most difficult tasks challenging other staff’s attitude that young people should not be allowed access to council buildings, resources and council property.

For some projects, like the “About Jobs” initiative, this was overcome by locating the project in a community centre central to daily activities, and about which local people have a sense of ownership. Young people and other community members spent a weekend covering the entire building with Indigenous designs, and it is a visual reminder in the community of their accomplishments. It is hard to imagine this project being run from the very impressive, but intimidating, main office of Cairns City Council in the central business district.

Community supportDeveloping and maintaining community

support for some youth programs is sometimes difficult. For example, in two local governments we contacted, urban art projects, targeting young “taggers” or graffiti artists, were seen by some as indulging criminal behaviour and a waste of ratepayers’ resources. Critics had their views regularly aired in the local media, putting pressure on the political futures of local councillors, particularly those seen as supporters of young people. This in turn put pressure upon the youth services teams. As a consequence, workers stated that there needs to be significant capacity for youth activities to “hold the front” or present an uncontroversial public image, particularly during the early stages of work.

This demonstrates some of the tensions involved in balancing the interests of the

broad community and young people. It also serves as a reminder that there are some difficulties associated with aspirations for community development. Indeed it may be the case that significant numbers of “the community” would rather see young people excluded from civic participation and public life. As one youth worker recalled:

I remember working in a local govern-ment youth centre that was managed by a community reference group. After some conflict between two groups of young people they wanted us to ban Aboriginal young people entirely from the centre. In that case I found myself working against the interests of that particular community because what they wanted was illegal and immoral.

Similar tensions can exist when working with different groups of young people. For example, while it can be wonderful to see a group of young people demonstrating leadership, planning events and taking on control over decisions, this may mean that other groups of young people inadvertently feel or become excluded. It can also make it difficult to recruit new members and groups. These concerns were expressed by a number of staff who worried that very capable young people could threaten or annoy other young people and hence restrict membership and the ongoing survival of a youth and community group.

Formal governance structures

Others consulted had more substantial criticisms of youth participation. For example, many with whom we spoke were sceptical of formal governance structures and the idea that youth participation is necessarily about getting youth representatives involved in a formal governance structure or some mechanism that is mirrored upon adult organisations. As one youth worker said,

109

“too many local governments have only got one thing in their youth participation repertoire: youth advisory councils or representative structures”.

There were at least two things that made this potentially difficult for those seeking youth participation of any substance. The first is that many see it as a method that is not effective, particularly if councils are wanting disadvantaged young people to participate. As the manager of Frontyard said, “few if any of the young people we see will get involved in a youth advisory council . . . these are for young people with much more advantage”. The second problem with formal youth governance structures is that many councils will rely on this strategy as their only youth participatory mechanism.

Appropriate media Another criticism of formal youth

governance structures is that young people are increasingly participating in social and community life through the use of virtual tools, multimedia and interactive technology. As a consequence many young people are more inclined to participate by “surfing” through a complex array of issues, using technologies that are fast, exciting and allow them to engage in very different temporal and spatial zones, as the Spinach project illustrates.

Traditional youth governance structures are time intensive, demand young people sit through much that is disengaging and boring, is dependent on travel to distant places and limits their contact to a small number of people. In contrast participating in a chat site allows young people to choose when they engage, opens up more opportunities for contact, makes it possible to participate at one’s own pace, can allow them to “travel” elsewhere to communicate with others and

involves less imposed constraints by adults. In addition, the culture of virtual community allows one to maintain privacy and indeed bracket age-based relations so that young people can recreate their identities and maintain a greater deal of autonomy.

Participation to cure social illsYouth participation is often seen as

having a significant youth problem-solving capacity. In other words, in the minds of many, youth participation can help deal with the many social problems experienced by young people. So the logic goes, if we can get young people to engage more in the life of their community they are more likely to resolve these problems (Bessant 2003, p. 11). Indeed, most of the projects we visited had their origins in concerns about alienated or disaffected young people who were “causing trouble”.

Unfortunately there is little evidence that participation, in itself, can alleviate social disorder. As one Melbourne worker said:

it is wrong to think that youth participation will somehow magically cure social issues that are of a global magnitude . . . in so doing you are also implying that young people should be sorting out these problems themselves . . . what you are also saying to young people is that we hold you responsible for these social ills.

Or as another Western Australian youth worker said, “a lot of this youth participation stuff is an attempt to take the heat off the real problems like poverty and unemployment”, a view shared by Bessant (2003, p. 11).

Unpacking collaboration and communityMuch has been said and written about

the important part that collaboration between levels of government and the community plays in assisting young people



to participate. For example, Botsman and Latham (2001) have argued for a shift towards what they call enabling state principles in an attempt to have governments better respond to social needs. This work emphasises the need to seek “joined-up solutions to joined-up problems”, the importance of having communities identify local problems and solutions, that change is dependent upon linking and that partnerships between community, government and business are necessary for responding to young people’s needs (Edgar 2001; Latham 2001; Botsman 2001; Latham 2003; Pusey 2003; Wierenga 2003; Hughes, Bellamy and Black 2000). Precisely what this means or how it might be achieved in local government settings remains unclear.

Community too is a problematic concept. For some, community is a warm and comfortable zone, a place of safety that involves pulling together in solidarity, particularly during times of crisis and trouble. However, community by its very character also necessitates exclusion, boundary making and the constraining of freedom. Local governments that are genuinely committed to the interests of young people need to understand that to talk about collaboration with the com-munity will involve dealing with the complex tension between civility and freedom.

Contradictory messagesA fundamental barrier to young people’s

inclusion in community life is, then, the contradictory messages they receive. For example, practitioners and councils talk about social inclusion at the same time as introducing curfews, allowing banning notices to be applied, establishing public space protocols that apply special conditions on young people’s behaviour and access to space, and doing little to challenge the abuse of young people’s human rights and equality.

ConclusionLocal government youth practice in

Australia is diverse – in terms of philosophical underpinnings, target groups, rationale and methods, range of collaborations, and focus. At the heart of much of it lie ideas about the participation of young people. At one end of the continuum, participation is thought of simply in terms of the attendance of young people at events and activities. At the other end are notions of full civic engagement by young people. Youth practice in local governments sits all along this continuum, and council staff struggle to find ways to engage young people more meaningfully. As part of this struggle, factors which inhibit the full participation of young people in the life of their communities are becoming better understood.

Local governments throughout Australia are taking up the challenge presented by young people in their communities in different ways. Given the geographic, economic, social, cultural and political diversity of the communities they represent it is not surprising that the youth practice they engage in draws upon many different models. Sometimes these models are consciously chosen, but frequently they emerge as a result of the histories, personalities, and dynamic local contexts in which they are embedded. This particularity of context must dictate what constitutes quality youth practice. However, there are some universal principles acknowledged as important, and flowing from these some suggestions for good practice.

What works?Not surprisingly, conclusions among our

informants about what assists good youth practice were varied. However, there was agreement on many characteristics of local

government activities that increase young people’s active involvement in their local community. Often insights were general and related to the operational business of working with young people. For example, many suggested good practice:

• is based on choice;

• has some tangible outcome for those involved;

• is related to important issues for young people;

• involves training, skills development and ongoing support for young people;

• demonstrates to young people that their work is valued;

• acknowledges the contribution of young people;

• is adequately resourced;

• takes into account young people’s limit-ed access to time, money, transport and social support;

10Towards quality youth practice


• provides young people with a sense of ownership in decisions;

• is regularly reviewed;

• involves negotiation and being flexible;

• respects the privacy of young people;

• allows young people to communicate and write in their own words;

• provides young people with feedback;

• deals with a broad range of issues;

• ensures that events are held at venues accessible to young people;

• publicly recognises the contribution of young people;

• provides young people with food and drink; and

• has at least one councillor actively involved.

Other features of good practice and key elements that contribute to it in local government are discussed below. This final chapter then summarises the findings from the review of literature, the survey and case study research to answer the key research question: what assists local governments improve the quality of life for young people?

Community resourcingIn describing what they did, many

local government workers referred to the importance of forming alliances and supporting the work of those, outside of council, who worked with or on behalf of young people. It became apparent that in any given local government much of the direct service work is carried out by youth and community organisations independent of council. Considerable time and resources are committed to supporting local networks, assisting groups to build and maintain infrastructure, gain funding and be informed about what others in the area are doing.

RelationshipsA key theme featured strongly in the

literature and also in our consultations was the fundamental importance of relationships in youth practice and youth participation. Typically these relationships are founded on principles such as trust, respect, empathy, reciprocity and a belief in the inherent value of young people. A key to the success of many projects is the quality of the relationship between council-sponsored youth workers. One young person encapsulated the importance of these workers, “without Katie (the youth worker) none of this is possible. She is what holds things together because she has such a lovely combination of skills and qualities and she is always available for us”.

The “About Jobs” initiative in Cairns is dependent upon the relationships established between the paid council worker, the two voluntary workers (including a prominent Indigenous woman) and the community, of which they are all acknowledged members. This requires very different responsibilities from workers who leave the workplace at the end of the day and escape to leafy suburbs elsewhere.

Having funIt is also critical that local government

initiatives aimed at youth participation be fun and interesting. Young people, especially those who had longstanding involvement in youth activities or groups, counted as a most crucial element in maintaining their involvement, the importance of having a good time and enjoying themselves. As one young person from Darwin put it:

one of the things you hear a lot of young people say is that they are bored or they drop out of things because they’re tired of something. One of the reasons GRIND (the Darwin Youth Newspaper) gets so

113

many young people involved for so long is that it is really fun.

FoodAnother theme emerging with surprising

regularity is the importance of food in holding together youth participatory events. According to many of our informants, food and drink chosen by young people or known to be popular with them is almost an essential item in youth participatory events. The combined elements of fun, food and friendship were cited by young people as important ingredients for the success of the GRIND youth newspaper initiative. As one young person said, “GRIND meetings and working together is fun . . . without this we would soon lose interest”. Another made the point that, “food is important too . . . most of us come to the meetings straight from school and as you know teenagers are usually at their hungriest at that time of day”.

Young people involved with an evening event which grew out of the “About Jobs” initiative, spoke about the importance of food (“but not healthy food!”) for their participation as volunteers. Each Friday night food is the first order of business, as many children and young people attending may have had little to eat during the day.

TimeA further important ingredient for success

in youth participation is time. Consistently, people we spoke to pointed to the need for patience on the part of local governments if they want to see young people get involved in community life. Those from the Kwinana Youth Service mentioned the importance of long-term initiatives so that young people can take time in influencing the life of a youth program. A person involved in the Frontyard initiative said, “look, there is

no real substitute for time. You can’t push things and can’t expect results overnight”.

SpaceSecuring space was seen as another

important element in youth participation. Compromising young people’s access to public space limits their capacity for civic engagement and the forming of the alliances necessary to participate in public life. A number of people consulted remarked that the trend towards regulating public space for young people is inconsistent with aspirations to build community. As the Manager of Frontyard said:

There is no point in talking about youth participation without first a real and firm commitment by groups like local governments to securing a space and place for young people. You can’t remove young people from the street and public life and then say you want them to participate.

It was the experience of most of those we consulted that particular groups of young people get targeted for extra regulation and are disqualified from openly accessing public space. For example, Indigenous young people, young women and disabled young people find it most difficult to enjoy public space in safety and unencumbered. At times this may mean that local governments provide space for the exclusive use of certain groups of young people, and pay special attention to the safety and design of certain areas to provide special access.

Practical activityAnother important element in youth

participatory work is that it must involve young people in action, work and practical outcomes. As one young person said, “young people won’t sit around and just talk, we get bored with this . . . we’ve got to get

Chapter 10Towards quality youth practice


into something”. It appears that the most successful participatory projects are those that get young people actively involved in doing and making things, working together on some product, event or towards some end other than simply talking, being consulted, or influencing others.

Some of this practical activity may come about in reciprocation for young people’s efforts. For example, members of the GRIND team in Darwin attributed part of its success to opportunities such as attending skills workshops in media production, reviewing films for free, getting new release CDs, and attending rock concerts and meeting band members. The Palmerston Public Library have a program of training that results in members of the Young Adults Group gaining regular casual work as library staff.

Important in maintaining young people’s interest is also creativity and innovation. One of the strengths that many young people bring to institutions like local government is that they can be less constrained, more inclined to embrace innovation and often keen to find expressive ways to communicate with others. Spinach, the Messenger/Dreaming project, the GRIND, Kwinana Youth Arts, and a host of the Frontyard projects all incorporate a large cultural development component, drawing on and encouraging the often ingenious, imaginative and resourceful skills of young people.

Flexibility and diversity of initiativesYoung people are as diverse as others

with different interests, levels of knowledge, tastes and contributions to make. Local government therefore best caters for young people’s diversity when it engages in a range of ways with different groups of

young people. While important, participatory bodies which necessitate certain levels of confidence in the public arena may be inaccessible to many young people. Some youth specific spaces may, by virtue of its ownership by one group, exclude other groups. Inadvertently some traditional youth programs (particularly where they involve involvement in organised sporting activities), may discriminate against young women. As one youth development officer said, “it is really important that local governments have a range of strings to their bows . . . we need to offer different things to different young people”.

Simple talkingCommunication is often so basic to civic

engagement that it is often ignored as an important ingredient. Young people, like many other community members, rarely share the language of planners, councillors, the business sector and other “experts” involved in local governance. Indeed one of the critical skills that young people learn as they get involved in local government is the language (often technical, rhetorical and quirky) of local government discourse. At the same time understanding young people’s language is often not simple. Like policy discourse, it too can change very quickly and be shaped by many trends and different cultural influences.

Young people’s own language is both important to them and the best means by which they can express their interests and views. Plain language use, clear communicative processes and a rapport between young people and council are then essential to good youth practice. Avoidance of what Watson (2003) describes as the new public language is crucial for youth practitioners.

115

Clarity of purpose and commitmentA further feature of good youth

participation practice is clarity. Many concluded that it is important that council make its commitment public, either through formal youth policies or other public expressions. While some made the point that youth participation work should not be preoccupied with “wordsmithing” this commitment ought to be shared by both councillors and council staff and clearly expressed on the public record.

Clarity about the purpose of the service or program is also important. Frequently, this may mean asking young people for whom the service is intended to describe it in their own words, as has happened with users of the Frontyard service. This work has been displayed throughout the service and used to communicate service functions to the public. Another example is the Spinach web site where the language of the site has been chosen by young people for young people.

Promotion of successOne of the key qualities of many young

people involved in the settings studied is an overwhelming optimism. What was very apparent when we visited local councils around the country was how reliant successful youth initiatives were upon the passion, energy and efforts of young people. However, young people’s sanguinity often stands in sharp contrast to how they are portrayed and treated by many adults and institutions. Indeed, there exists an institutional culture, particularly among funding bodies that youth programs have to first establish some kind of deficit before being eligible for funding support. As one young person remarked: “we don’t get to celebrate our achievements, instead we have to make ourselves out to be ‘deros’ to get any funding”.

On the other hand, the most successful youth initiatives were those celebrated and promoted. Initiatives such as those carried out in Moreland, Darwin and Kwinana enjoyed growth and popularity as a consequence of celebrating the successes of young people. Therefore celebrating what works and how young people have contributed has a duel purpose; it intrinsically represents good youth practice and it helps build success.

ResourcesAdequate council resourcing of youth

participation initiatives is a key to its success. However, resourcing does not necessarily mean large amounts of money for youth programs. Indeed one of the features of some of the programs chosen for study was that they made very efficient and effective use of relatively little. For example, the GRIND youth newspaper involves over 60 young people in the production of four editions of a newspaper that has a distribution rate of over 3 000 copies.

Councils can also play an important role in supporting young people to gain access to other resources and opportunities. For example, in 1998 the Alcoa company in Western Australia was keen to support a community arts project. Kwinana Council staff heard about this and brokered a deal between Alcoa and a small group of young people who were keen to form a youth theatre group. This was the genesis of the Short Fuse Youth Theatre Company which now has a membership of over 100 young people.

Acting strategicallyA key element in good youth practice

is the ability to operate strategically. Most people with whom we spoke indicated that, because of negative treatment of



youth issues, there is often political risk associated with council support for young people. For example, one councillor maintained that he often experienced a backlash when he publicly supported council’s involvement in youth activities. As a result it was important for council to be strategic about their plans, to carefully manage when and how they introduced new programs and to manage potentially controversial work leading up to council elections or important political moments. One of the ways they did this was to initiate events and activities during favourable times for young people. For example, one council had received considerable positive media coverage of one of its youth events. In the following weeks council staff were able to easily convince councillors that this event should be included in council annual budgets.

The role of failureA consistent feature of most youth

initiatives undertaken by local government is that they appear to be at least partly prompted by failure to manage youth problems. This can present some problems and frustrations for those keen on building opportunities for local government to engage with young people. For example, as the Youth Arts Officer at the Town of Kwinana remarked, “this means we have to try and build our programs around trying to fix up youth crime or resolve problems for messed up kids . . . it also means motivated and talented artists get painted as young deros and dysfunctional freaks”.

At times, however, this problematising of young people also accentuates the successes and achievements of youth programs. It can make them appear novel, interesting and even exciting to other

members of the community. Indeed, there is evidence from our research that the more demonised young people become the more attractive their work and activities become. For example, workers involved in the Kwinana Youth Arts projects noted that many people were more drawn to the young people’s performances and artwork when they realised they were from what one described as “Kwinana, the dangerous part of town”. With uncanny wisdom young people seem to have understood this when they chose to call the annual youth arts festival “FreakFest” as a symbol of the successes of those otherwise constituted as the freaks, the misfits and the dangerous.

Respect, sensitivity and goodwillMany of our informants spoke about the

importance of a particular set of qualities that assist with youth participatory endeavours. Most agreed that without genuine goodwill on the part of council there could be little success in encouraging young people to participate in civic life. Likewise most took the view that young people cannot be expected to sustain a sense of their own worth or participate in public life if institutions and local government neglect them or show them little respect. One worker made the point that:

the greatest enemy of our project (establishing a public space protocol) was disrespect for young people . . . we needed to ensure that we included adults in key positions that would act as moderators and demonstrate their profound and intrinsic respect for young people.

Selection and education of staff Many consulted during this research

attributed much of the success of youth

117

initiatives to the energy, dedication and commitment of youth practitioners and other council staff. These people are important for a number of reasons. They often act as a resource, undertaking duties and following through with jobs at the request of young people. In addition, these people act as the conduit through which council resources are accessed by young people. For example, Darwin City Council’s Youth Development Officer who administers council money provided for various activities, has made arrangements for the GRIND team to have a specifically allocated computer, accommodated in the Youth Space, adjacent to the youth officer’s desk. She is also the central person in assisting with the planning of skills workshops and other events, and at the request of young people has been given an important role on the newspaper production team, passing on correspondence, maintaining records, reminding other members of deadline and what they had agreed to do.

Many interviewed also spoke about the importance of the style and manner of youth practitioners. They talked about how central these people are in constantly offering positive affirmation of young people’s achievements, instilling in youth groups a culture that encourages and builds people’s confidence.

Council staff can also fulfil an interpretive function, explaining council processes to young people and helping understand the language of other groups. This can be crucial, particularly given that in these settings young people have regular contact with adults whose language and ideas are technical, abstract to a general audience or unfamiliar to young people. For example, one young person we spoke to said that the council youth worker:

helps walk us through what is being said and often answers many of the questions that come up after we’ve interviewed . . . she is also really good to have around when people join the group or when the younger ones are confused about what is going on and what certain things mean . . . she is always getting us to explain things to each other.

Given the importance of council staff in this regard special attention must be paid to the recruitment, training and ongoing support of youth practitioners. In particular these members of staff must be encouraged to build the skills of talented interpreter, able to move between a number of very different language and cultural domains, able to communicate with young people at the same time as understanding the technical systems, policies and conventions of local government.

The contribution of young peopleFinally, but most crucially, youth

participatory activities are reliant on the energy, commitment and contributions of young people. Talented young people, particularly those with abilities that often go unnoticed, were the most important ingredient for success in youth participation. As one youth worker said, “we talk about what we should do to get young people to participate and often forget that without them it wouldn’t happen”. Another said, “it doesn’t matter how much spinning you try and do, how much you promote your formal committees and YACs, unless you manage to find young people who are alive and motivated you don’t get youth participation”. Local governments can do much to enhance opportunities for young people when they celebrate their achievements and focus public attention on the contributions they make.



Towards a framework for quality local government youth practice

The challenges confronting local governments committed to providing quality practice to young people are many. Local governments are faced with increasing and often-competing demands, have to deal with emerging and difficult issues, and need to tackle an array of complex local conditions

It would be a mistake to prescribe or impose from outside courses of action or claim that particular methods or programs can be applied universally. Accordingly, the following represents an attempt to establish some broad parameters or key principles for specific local initiatives.

A plan for improving youth practice in local government

On the basis of the evidence from the literature and our research, there are a number of aims and corresponding actions which contribute to quality local government youth practice. Council staff seeking to improve their practice could include these in their plans for working with young people (Table 13).

With the possible exception of freedom from harassment, the aims are not difficult to achieve and many of our case studies incorporate some if not most of them. Youth practitioners could use Table 13 as a check list from time to time in the life of particular projects, and with respect to the whole range of their youth services and activities, to gauge the extent to which they are meeting the likely needs of young people.

Principles to guide quality youth practiceThe plan articulated above is based

on international principles pertaining to the rights of young people. While such

principles are contested within sections of the Australian community, we believe they are fundamental to shaping innovative attempts by local government to build respectful youth initiatives. These include the following:

• councils express and model due respect for the dignity and rights of young people (see Article 3 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child);

• councils take seriously young people’s human rights, in particular the rights other citizens are accorded, such as rights to suffrage, the right to petition, the right to responsible representation in government and the right to be heard in judicial and administrative proceed-ings (see Article 12 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child);

• councils clearly articulate who they will target rather than simply claiming that their services are available for all, tak-ing into account the special needs of marginalised groups (see Preamble UN Convention on the Rights of the Child);

• councils accord young people space, place in civic life, freedom of associa-tion and freedom of peaceful assembly (see Article 15 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child);

• councils build relationships of sub-stance, integrity and respect with young people, protecting them from interfer-ence to their privacy, family, home or attacks to their honour and reputation (see Article 16 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child);

• councils create opportunities for par-ticipation that are fun and enjoyable for young people, recognising the im-portant part food, leisure, music and popular culture play in young people’s lives (see Article 31 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child);

119

Aims Action

Clarity of purpose Make clear the level of participation sought – attendance, advice, or full civic participation

Employ youth practitioners Employ, nurture, finance and educate youth practitioners with experience, dedication, education, an interest in young people and an ability to use language that is recognised both by young people and within local government settings

Constellation of activities Publicly demonstrate their loyalty, respect and faith in young people by funding and initiating a constellation of programs and activities to cater to young people’s wide variety of interests, needs and passions

Community involvement Model their respect for young people by persuading local business, elected members and other community leaders to give their time and loyalty to youth initiatives

Creativity and ingenuity Find imaginative, creative and ingenious ways to excite young people about the possibilities of involving themselves in civic life

Celebrate young people Publicly demonstrate their admiration for young people’s achievements, action and potential

Make life interesting Draw upon participatory methods that excite young people, enthuse their passion and aspire them to do great things as citizens

Integrate Find ways to include young people, their interests and their matters to be integrated into the main business of council

Listen to young people Provide means by which young people can call attention to their interest and what is important to them

Freedom from harassment Restore young people’s ability to contribute to the safe use of public spaces and public facilities without unnecessary constraints

Table 13: A plan for improving youth practice in local government


• councils engage in long-term work recognising that young people need patience and time to build futures for themselves in their communities (see Article 5 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child);

• council strategies and programs involve young people in action, work and practi-cal outcomes, reciprocating their efforts and protecting them from economic and

social exploitation (see Article 32 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child);

• council initiatives use methods that are creative and innovative and involve young people in literary pursuits, cul-tural development and artistic endeav-ours (see Article 31 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child);

• council practice is clear, public and communicated in a language and


style that is comprehensible to young people;

• council devote appropriate levels of re-sources to the needs and interests of young people, giving priority to their income, housing, employment, health and other primary material needs (see Preamble United Nations 1989); and

• council validate and practically sup-port the work of local organisations and families, particularly where these groups fulfil an important role in meeting the needs of young people from cultur-ally and linguistically diverse backgrounds (see Articles 9, 10, 18, and 30 UN Conven-tion on the Rights of the Child).

Quality youth practicesIn addition to appointing youth practition-

ers and advocates, resourcing youth and other community services, supporting formal youth governance structures and maintaining a commitment to youth initiatives, these principles might be implemented through:

• the adoption of a local charter of youth rights;

• according young people the right to vote in local government elections and make petitions to council;

• dismantling local youth curfews, instead instituting initiatives that encourage young people to responsibly use public space and make young people’s involvement in public institutions more visible;

• council becoming involved in a constellation of initiatives, catering for diverse groups of young people that are targeted clearly;

• the appointment of local Commissioners of Youth who will act as special advo-cates for young people;

• designing council facilities and manag-

ing public space so that they are multi-functional and available for a range of purposes and events;

• giving young people more open access to the council buildings and facilities;

• investing in public buildings, facilities and services that are designed to encourage young people’s safe access and use and offering incentives to those who make special provision for young people;

• organising opportunities for groups of young people to meet others who share similar social and cultural interests;

• buy quality literature, books and other resources, making these accessible to a broad range of young people and being mindful of young people’s linguistic diversity;

• council challenging the unfair and dis- criminatory practices of other levels of government, business and community groups and mounting strategic campaigns to counter practices that compromise the rights and interests of young people;

• encouraging community leaders with high profiles to model respect and mod-erate community antagonism towards young people;

• resource youth and community groups to encourage them to meet regularly, share information and, where possible, resources;

• protecting young people’s special entitlements accorded under state and international law;

• using these rights as a foundation upon which alliances are formed so that any partnerships which breach or compromise these rights must not be entered into;

• auditing existing agreements, protocols or contracts between “stakeholders” in relation to these rights;

121Chapter 10Towards quality youth practice

• encouraging local media to represent the contributions of young people, report responsibly on youth issues and interests and have young people in-volved in the production of local media content; and

• building programs that convince key community leaders, businesses and other groups to act as allies and mentors to young people.

ConclusionYoung people have demonstrated that

they are “alive and motivated” when involved in programs and activities of their choosing. Their engagement goes

well beyond the skate parks and youth advisory councils of the past, involving everything from frontline service delivery to fringe arts and performance, newspaper production, and online participatory forums. Local governments also do more han offer services to young people. Some outsource, others resource existing groups, many spend time articulating formal youth policy, while considerable energy goes into planning, coordinating and engaging in the politics of representing young people. Any local government seeking to encourage young people, in all their diversity, to make a contribution in their community, have some inspiring models from which to start a conversation and take action.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporation for Tourism Queensland. (2003). Funding Application. Community Employment Assistance Program. DET Breaking the Unemployment Cycle.

Abbott, J., Chambers, R., Dunn, C., Harris, T., Merode, E., Porter, G., Townsend, J. & Weiner, D. (1998). Participatory GIS; opportunity or oxymoron? PLA Notes, London: International Institute for Environment and Development.

Ackermans, M. (1991). A graffiti and vandalism strategy. Australian Parks & Recreation, 27(2), 11–13.

Adams, D. & Goldbard, A. (2001). Creative Community: The Arts of Cultural Development. New York: Rockefellow Foundation.

Angwin, J., Blackmore, J., Harrison, L. & Shacklock, G. (2001). Pathway planning and “becoming somebody”: exploring

the tensions between wellbeing and credentialism with students at (educational) risk. Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education Conference, Fremantle, WA.

Aries, P. (1962). Centuries of Childhood. London: Cape.

Aulich, C. (1999). From convergence to divergence: Reforming Australian local governments. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 58, 12–23.

Australian Youth Foundation (2002). Youth Partnership and Participation. Retrieved 2003 from http://www.youngaustralians.org/pdfs/Publications/youthpart.pdf

Barnett, K. (2003). Youth Participation Handbook: A Guide for Organisations Seeking to Involve Young People on Boards and Committees. Adelaide: Minister for Youth.

References


Bauman, Z. (2001). Community: Seeking Safety in an Insecure World. Cambridge: Polity.

Bessant, J. (1996). Reforming Victoria’s child and adolescent services: Citizenship rights and young people. Just Policy, 5(February), 31–42.

Bessant, J. (1997). Free market economics and new directions for youth workers. Youth Studies Australia, 16(2), 34–40.

Bessant, J. (2002). Rights, obligations and the public sphere: Arguments and options for securing just policies for young people. Children Australia, 27(3), 33–40.

Bessant, J. (2003). Youth Participation, Democratic Practice and Problem Solving. Keynote Address to the Youth Affairs Network Queensland State Conference, April 2003.

Bessant, J. & Emslie, M. (1996). Structural reforms and social implications: The impact of local government amalgamations on youth work. Youth Studies Australia, 15(1), 39–43.

Bessant, J. Sercombe, H. & Watts, R. (1998). Youth Studies: An Australian Perspective. Melbourne: Longman.

Bessant, J. & Webber, R. (1999). Mapping career options for youth workers. Youth Studies Australia, September 1999, p. 47–51.

Botsman, P. & Latham, M. (2001). The Enabling State: People Before Bureaucracy. Sydney: Pluto.

Botsman, P. (2001). Independent schools, community management and innovation. In P. Botsman, & M. Latham (Eds.), The Enabling State: People Before Bureaucracy. (pp. 59–72). Sydney: Pluto.

Brennan, D. (1998). Government and civil society: restructuring community services. In B. C. P. Smyth (Ed.), Contesting the Australian Way: States, Markets and Civil Society. (pp. 124–136). London: Cambridge.

Britton, B. (1987). Youth workers as social workers. In T. Jeffs & M. Smith (Eds.), Youth Work. (pp. 25–37). London: Macmillan.

Carson, E. & Wadham, B. (2001). Regionalism and contractualism: When principles collide. Just Policy, 24(December), 3–11.

Caulfield, J. (2003). Local government: reform in comparative perspective. In B. Dollery, N. Marshall & A. Worthington (Eds.), Reshaping Australian Local Government: Finance, Governance and Reform. (pp. 13–34). Sydney: University of New South Wales.

Centre for Local Government (2000). Palmerston Town Council and Northern Territory Government: Integrated Community Planning. Sydney: Centre for Local Government, University of Technology Sydney.

Chambers, R. (1994). Participatory rural appraisal (PRA): analysis of experience, World Development, 22/9, p. 1253–1268.

Cooke, B. & Kaothari, U. (Eds.), (2001). Participation: The New Tyranny. London: Zed.

Cooper, T. & White, R. (1994). Models of youth work intervention. Youth Studies Australia, Summer 1994. pp. 30–35.

Crane, P. & Dee, M. (2001). Young people, public space and new urbanism. Youth Studies Australia, 20(1), 11–18.

Darwin City Council (2001). Community Services Report 29/8/01. Darwin: Darwin City Council.

125

Department of Education, Science and Training (2002). The National Report to Parliament on Indigenous Education and Training, 2001. Retrieved on 18/8/03 from http://www.dest.gov.au/schools/publications/2002/nrpiet/full.pdf

Department of Health and Human Services (1999). North East Tasmania Health Needs Study December 1998. Hobart: Dorset Council.

Edgar, D. (2001). The Patchwork Nation: Re-thinking Government – Re-building Community. Sydney: Harper Collins.

Foreman, A. (1987). Youth workers as Redcoats. In T. Jeffs & M. Smith (Eds.), Youth Work. (pp. 12–24). London: Macmillan.

Gillis, J. (1974). Youth and History: Tradition and Change in European Age Relations 1770–present. New York: Academic Press.

Green, G. P. & Haines, A. (2002). Asset Building and Community Development. London: Sage.

Hall, P. (1993). When holding hands is not enough. In J. Inglis & L. Rogan (Eds.), Beyond Swings and Roundabouts: Shaping the Future of Community Services in Australia. (pp. 169–190). Sydney: Pluto.

Harris, P. (1999). Public welfare and liberal governance. In A. Peterson, I. Barnes, J. Dudley & P. Harris (Eds.), Postructuralism, Citizenship and Social Policy (pp. 25–64). London: Routledge.

Holdsworthy, R. (1992). What do we mean by student participation? Youth Studies, Winter 1992. pp. 26–27.

Holdsworthy, R. (2001). Youth participation. A paper presented to the “Charting the

Course” Youth Services Conference. Batemans Bay.

Hood, C. (1996). Exploring variations in public management reform. In J. H. Bekke & T. Toonen (Eds.), Civil Service Systems in Comparative Perspective. Bloomington: Indiana University.

Hughes, P., Bellamy, J. & Black, A. (2000). Building social trust through education. In I. Winter (Ed.), Social Capital and Public Policy in Australia. (pp. 225–249). Sydney: Australian Institute of Family Studies.

Ingram, G. (1987). Youth workers as entrepreneurs. In T. Jeffs & M. Smith (Eds.), Youth Work. (pp. 114–132). London: Macmillan.

Jeffs, T. & Smith, M. (Eds.). (1987). Youth Work. London: Macmillan.

Jeffs, T. & Smith, M. (Eds.). (1990). Young People, Inequality and Youth Work. London: Macmillan.

Johns, S., Kilpatrick, S. Falk, I. & Mulford, B. (2001). Leadership from within: Rural community revitalisation and the school-community partnership. Youth Studies Australia, 20(3), 20–26.

Johnson, A. (2003). Financing local government in Australia. In B. Dollery, N. Marshall & A. Worthington (Eds.), Reshaping Australian Local Government: Finance, Governance and Reform. (pp. 37–63). Sydney: University of New South Wales.

Kenway, J. (1993). Reinventing Youth in the National Interest. Paper presented at the Rethinking policies for young people: Towards a National Perspective, University of Melbourne.

Kerr, L. & Savelsberg, H. (2001). The community service sector in the era of

References


the market model: Facilitators of social change or servants of the State? Just Policy, 23(September), 22–32.

Kiss, R. (2003). Reasserting local democracy? In B. Dollery, N. Marshall & A. Worthington (Eds.), Reshaping Australian Local Government: Finance, Governance and Reform. (pp. 101–116). Sydney: University of New South Wales.

Lacey, F. (1987). Youth workers as community workers. In T. Jeffs & M. Smith (Eds.), Youth Work. (pp. 38–51). London: Macmillan.

Lansdown, G. (2002). Global priorities for youth: youth participation in decision-making. Review of the Ten Priority Areas of the World Programme of Action to the Year 2000 and Beyond. Retrieved 2002 from http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unyin/helsinki/index.html

Latham, M. (2001). Making welfare work. In P. Botsman & M. Latham (Eds.), The Enabling State: People Before Bureaucracy. (pp. 115–131). Sydney: Pluto.

Latham, M. (2003). From the Suburbs: Building a Nation from our Neighbourhoods. Sydney: Pluto.

Matthews, H. (2001). Citizenship, youth councils and young people’s participation. Journal of Youth Studies, 4(3), 299–318.

Maunders, D. (1990). Youth work as a response to social values. Youth Studies Australia, 9(2), 42–50.

May, P. (2003). Amalgamation and virtual local government. In B. Dollery, N. Marshall & A. Worthington (Eds.), Reshaping Australian Local Government: Finance, Governance and Reform. (pp. 79–98). Sydney: University of New South Wales.

McLaren, R. (1995–96). Young people’s participation in local government. Transitions, 5(2 & 3), 55–59.

Mickler, S. (1998). The Myth of Privilege: Aboriginal Status, Media Visions, Public Development. Fremantle: Fremantle Arts Centre Press.

Mosse, D. (2001). “People’s knowledge”, participation and patronage: operations and representations in rural development. In Cooke, B. & Kaothari, U. (Eds.), Participation: The New Tyranny. pp. 16–35. London: Zed.

Mudaly, B. (1999). Building capacity in culturally diverse communities to enhance resilience in young people and their families. Youth Studies Australia, 18(4), 41–48.

Muirhead, T. (2002). Weaving Tapestries: A Handbook for Building Communities. Perth: WA Local Government Community Services Association.

Muncie, J. (1983). The Trouble with Kids Today. London: Hutchinson.

Nabben, R. (2001). Managerialism, the “quality movement” and community services – dancing with the devil? Just Policy, 22(June), 43–47.

Nevile, A. (2000). The implementation of competitive tendering in the Australian welfare sector. Just Policy, Advocacy and Social Action, 18(April), 15–23.

New South Wales Department of Local Government (1997). How Local Councils Consult with Young People: A Report on Findings from a Survey of Local Councils in NSW. Sydney: Department of Local Government.

127

New South Wales Commission for Children and Young People (2003). Participation. Sydney: NSW Commission for Children and Young People.

Northern Midlands (2002). 2002 Longford Community Safety Plan. Retrieved 15/7/03 from http:www.tasmaniacentral.tas.gov.au/northernmidlands/pdf/communitysafetyplan.pdf

Palmer, D. (2002). Community development or volkgemeinschaft? What are the costs of community? Paper presented at the Local Government Community Services Association (Australia) Community Development Conference, Scarborough WA.

Palmerston City Council (2003). Palmerston CBD Public Spaces Protocol, 2003. Palmerston: Palmerston City Council.

Paterson, K. (1999). Seeking counsel: Young people’s involvement in local government decision-making processes. Youth Studies Australia, 18(3), 41–46.

Pearlstein, S. & Bliss, J. (1994). Generating Community: Intergenerational Partner-ships through the Expressive Arts. New York: ESTA.

Phillips, T., Stacy, K. & Milner, J. (2001). You’re a peer what? Clarifying the roles of peer supporters, educators and researchers for youth consultants. Youth Studies Australia, 20(4), 40–48.

Pusey, M. (2003). The Experience of Middle Australia: The Dark Side of Economic Reform. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.

Putnam, R. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6, 65–78.

Queensland Government (2002). Queensland Youth Charter: Queensland Government’s

Commitment to Engaging with Young People. Retrieved 22/03/2003 from www.generate.qld.gov.au/PDF/youth_charter.pdf

Raffe, D. (2003). Pathways linking education and work: A review of concepts, research, and policy debates. Journal of Youth Studies, 6(1), 3–19.

Robins, N. (1996). Shopping centre development and youth consultations. Youth Studies Australia, 15(1), 37–38.

Rose, N. (1999). Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. London: Cambridge University Press.

Rosseter, B. (1987). Youth workers as educators. In T. Jeffs & M. Smith (Eds.), Youth Work. (pp. 52–65). London: Macmillan.

Saggers, S., Carter, M., Boyd, S., Cooper, T. & Sonn, C. (2003). Measuring community development; perspectives from local government in Western Australia. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 38(1), 19–37.

Stacey, K., Webb, E., Hills, S.-L., Lagzdins, N., Moulds, D., Phillips, T., et al. (2002). Relationships and power. Youth Studies Australia, 21(1), 44–51.

Stewart, H. (1998). Theorising youth and difference. Youth Studies Australia, 17(2), 36–40.

Stone, C. (1987). Youth workers as caretakers. In T. Jeffs & M. Smith (Eds.), Youth Work. (pp. 66–81). London: Macmillan.

Tait, G. (1993). Reassessing street kids: a critique of subculture theory. In R. White (Ed.), Youth Subcultures: History, Theory and the Australian Experience. Hobart: National Clearinghouse for Youth Studies.

Tasmanian Office of Youth Affairs. (1999). Tasmanian Youth Policy Framework for Local Government, Retrieved 22/1/2003

References


from www.youthaffairs.tas.gov.au/publications/Youth%20Policy%20Framework%for%20LG.doc

Taylor, T. (1987). Youth workers as character builders. In T. Jeffs & M. Smith (Eds.), Youth Work. (pp. 133–150). London: Macmillan.

Teasdale, J. & Powell, N. (1987). Youth workers and juvenile justice. In T. Jeffs & M. Smith (Eds.), Youth Work. (pp. 82–98). London: Macmillan.

Thorpe, R. (1985). Community work and ideology: an Australian perspective. In R. Thorpe & J. Petruchenia (Eds.), Community Work or Social Change: An Australian Perspective. (pp. 11–27).London: Routledge.

United Nations (1989). The Convention on the Rights of the Child. New York: United Nations.

Van Moorst, H. (1983). Working with youth: a political process. National Workers with Youth Conference, Sydney. pp. 38–43.

Victorian Office for Youth. (2002). Respect: the Government’s Vision for Young People: A Framework for Policy and Program Development. Retrieved 22/01/2003 from www.youth.vic.gov.au/youth/pdfs/respect.pdf

Walsh, F. & Mitchell, P. (Eds.), (2002). Planning for Country. Alice Springs: Jukurrpa.

Walther, A. Hejl, G. M. & Jensen, T. B. (2002). Youth Transitions, Youth Policy and Participation: State of the Art Report: Working Paper 1. Retrieved 6/2/03, 2003, from http://www.iris-egris.de/yoyo/pdf/YoYoW1StateofArt.pdf

Watson, D. (2003). Death Sentence: The Decay of Public Language. Sydney: Knopf.

Westhorp, G. (1987). Planning for Youth Participation: A Resource Kit, Youth Sector Training Council of South Australia.

White, R. (1990). No Space of Their Own: Young People and Social Control in Australia. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.

White, R. (2001). Youth participation in designing public spaces. Youth Studies Australia, 20(1), 18–26.

White, R. (2002). Pros and cons of early intervention. Youth Studies Australia, 21(4), 16–23.

White, R. & Wilson, B. (1991). Whose future on whose terms? In R. White & B. Wilson (Eds.), For Your Own Good: Young People and State Intervention in Australia: a special edition of the Journal of Australian Studies, (pp. 1–70). Bundoora: La Trobe University.

Whiteley, S. (2001). Why don’t they just enrol in a tertiary course or get a job? Youth Studies Australia, 20(2), 23–28.

Wierenga, A. (2003). Sharing a New Story: Young People in Decision-Making. Melbourne: The Foundation for Young Australians and Youth Research Centre.

Wyn, J. & White, R. (1997). Rethinking Youth. St Leonards: Allen & Unwin.

Youth Coalition of the ACT. (2002). Policy Platform Update Final Draft 13 December 2002. Retrieved 14/05/03 from www.youthcoalition.net/library/docs/pdf/draft_policyplatform.pdf.

Appendix 1

Detailed methodology

Reference GroupOur first task was to form a Reference

Group. The purpose of this group was to: facilitate access to local government; select case study sites; advise on appropriate ways of consulting young people; review research progress; and monitor access and equity issues. The group comprised elected and employed members of local government, a youth work academic, two members of the 2002 National Youth Roundtable, and an ATSIC employee. They came from seven states and territories (see Appendix 2).

Literature review The literature review surveys: changes

to local government over the past three decades, and the increasing emphasis on community services; the way in which young people have been depicted in scholarly literature and the impact of this in youth

policy and practice; the development of youth work; and the growth of approaches which emphasise community development and capacity building among young people.

Instrument developmentTo ascertain the range of youth services,

and service models, offered by local government a brief online survey (with hard copy versions available) was developed (Appendix 3). The survey was designed to provide descriptive data on: the identification of services/policies/programs provided by each local government authority (LGA) target group(s); funding sources; in-house or external service provision; involvement of young people in the process; and employment of dedicated workers for young people. The draft survey was reviewed by the Reference Group, and the final version uploaded online in April 2003. Survey questions were pre-coded to enable computer analysis. The online survey data was automatically loaded into Access database files (hard copy data was

Appendices


loaded manually), and later transferred to Exel and SPSS formats for analysis.

In addition to the online survey, an interview schedule was developed for the interviews upon which the case studies were based (Appendix 4). These were used as a guide only, and adapted for each interview. Questions explored the history of the initiative, its aims and objectives, activities, participation by young people, achievements, and challenges.

Sample selection Approximately 750 local government

bodies throughout Australia, representing diverse metropolitan, regional, rural and Indigenous communities were contacted and asked to complete the survey. Identification of councils was possible through a database obtained from the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA). Those LGAs whose email addresses proved non-existent or rarely accessed (29 in number) were provided with a hard copy of the survey. Most, though not all, were Indigenous bodies in remote Australia, and were predominantly in Queensland and the Northern Territory. LGAs were informed of the survey before its release, at the time of its release, and a week into its run. A prize was offered for participation. During the last week of its advertised run, LGAs which had not responded were targeted and asked to complete the survey. 219 valid responses were received, a rate of approximately one in three.

Data collection

Selection of case studies

Selection of programs for case study analysis involved a number of criteria. Self-identification through the online survey involved: the existence of an innovative

program for young people that could work well elsewhere; the availability of suitable documentation of the program; participation of young people in the program; and a willingness to be interviewed. In addition, case studies overall needed to demonstrate diversity in terms of:

• location (urban/rural/regional/remote);

• jurisdiction (all states and territories);

• Indigenous, culturally and linguistically, and gender diverse composition;

• provider model (direct services/ outsourced services);

• type of council (corporate/community orientation); and

• history of service delivery (long-stand-ing programs/novice programs).

A list of potential sites was reviewed by the Reference Group and 14 study sites were chosen with all states and territories (except the ACT) included (Appendix 5).

Field visits

Field visits were brief (two to four working days) and the timing was dependent on the availability of local government employees. In some instances these times did not coincide with easy access to young people, and opportunistic interviews and casual conversations were necessary. In-depth interviews were conducted with administrators, coordinators, practitioners, and participant/recipients of the services/programs wherever possible.

Data analysisOnline survey data permitted descriptive

quantitative analyses of: the range of local government services provided for young people; recreational facilities; target groups of local government services; main sources of funding for youth services;

131

forms of youth participation in local government; groups in receipt of in-kind support; in-house and external service provision; youth services employees of local government; and innovative programs for young people (Chapter 3). Initially, we had hoped to be able to do some statistical analyses of these data, but the limited sample and data set made this not worth pursuing.

Interview data was used to develop case studies of each program selected for a site visit. While most of the data in the case studies is comparable, some variability exists due to the different researchers involved,

differential access to documentary data and to informants for interview.

WritingWriting the report presented some

challenges. These have to do with the style, length and comprehensiveness of the report. We have tried to write for an informed lay audience, and restricted academic language as much as possible, while locating youth services within broad academic debates about young people. The case studies are featured, in spite of their length, because we believe they provide concrete examples which others can adapt to their own situations and the detail is important.

Appendices


Appendix 2

Reference groupJohn Bailey Darwin City Councillor

Judith Bessant Associate Professor and Director, Social Policy and Advocacy Research Centre, Australian Catholic University

Stuart Boyd Social Planner, Adelaide City Council

Janie Dickenson Mayor, Launceston City Council

David Khoury Member, 2002 Australian National Youth Roundtable

Ralph Lahey Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, Mount Isa, Qld

Paul Martin Manager, Community Support Services, Shire of Mundaring, WA

Mandy Smith Team Leader, Community Engagement Group, Adelaide City Council

Selena Uibo Member, 2002 National Youth Roundtable

133

Appendix 3

Online survey

The Local Government and Young People Survey Dear Local Government OfficerPlease take a few minutes to complete this survey. Your assistance will provide a valued contribution to a national research project investigating the programs, policies and services Local Government offers to young people. If you need to obtain information from other officers in your Local Government to complete the form below, please distribute it to the relevant officers with the sections you require information on marked out. Please ask them to return the form to you. The form below should be filled in and returned to the address below. If the spaces are not large enough, please attach comments. 1. Please provide the following contact information:

Name Job Title Local Government Organisation Street Address Address (cont.) City State/Territory Postal Code Mobile Phone Work Phone FAX Email Web site address (URL)

2. Does your Local Government provide programs, policies or services that are specifically targeted at young people? (Circle the appropriate answer).

Yes No

3a. Does your Local Government provide any of the following young people specific programs, policies or services? (Tick as many as are applicable) Leadership programs for young people

Community – young people policies Counselling services for young people

Youth crime prevention Sexual health counselling for young people

Appendices


Drug and alcohol counselling/programs/services for young people

Advisory services

At risk programs

Outreach programs for young people

Welfare programs for young people

Accommodation (crisis and or medium/long-term)

Curfews for young people

Health services for young people

Mental health services for young people

Employment training services for young people

Personal development programs for young people

Arts/crafts programs for young people

Drama/theatre programs for young people

Sports programs for young people

Recreation programs for young people

Indigenous young people programs/policies/services

Non-English speaking background young people programs/policies/services

Women’s programs/policies/ services (specifically for young women)

Men’s programs/policies/ services (specifically for young men)

Library services for young people

Other programs/policies or services for young people

3b. If your Local Government provides “Other programs/policies or services for young people” please list them here:

4a. Please indicate which of the following groups are targeted by your Local Government’s young people specific programs policies/services: (Tick as many as applicable)

Indigenous young people

Young people from non-English speaking backgrounds

Young people with disabilities

Gay and lesbian young people

Unemployed young people

Young people at risk

Young women (only)

Young men (only)

None of the above

Other

4b. If “Other” groups are targeted by your Local Government’s young people specific policies please describe these groups here:

135

5. What is the main source of funding for your Local Government’s young people specific services? (Tick as many as applicable)

Local Government rates and charges

State or Territory Government funding

Commonwealth Government funding

Non-Government Organisations

Private enterprise

Lotteries

Fee-for-service

Other

6a. What age groups are targeted by your Local Government’s young people specific programs/policies/services

Under 12

13–18

19–25

Over 25

Other age range

6b. Please specify other age range here:

7a. Are there opportunities for young people to participate in planning your Local Government’s young people specific programs/policies/services? (Circle the appropriate answer)

Yes

No

7b. If yes, there are opportunities for young people to participate in your Local Government’s young people specific programs/policies/services please describe how these opportunities take place:

8. Does your local government provide network facilitation and/or service coordination for community youth service providers (i.e. service providers not directly employed

by your local government)?Yes

No

9. Does your Local Government contribute to the development of youth policies and/or legislation at a state or national level?

Yes

No

10a. Does your Local Government provide grants, council premises or office facilities to any of the following groups: (Tick as many as apply)

Community young people groups

Appendices


Rural young people groupsYMCAChurch or religion-based young people groupsScouts or Girl Guides Youth drama theatreYouth arts/craft groupsYouth recreation groupsYouth sports clubsYouth school groupsOther youth groups

10b If your Local Government provides grants, council premises or office facilities to “Other young people groups”, please name these groups here:

11. Does your Local Government support a young people advisory committee?YesNo

12a. If your Local Government provides any of the following services please indicate how they are provided: in-house, external, a combination of the two, or N/A:

Counselling services:Health:Mental health:Employment training services:Personal development:Arts/crafts:Drama theatre:Sports:Programs/policies/services for Indigenous young people:Programs/policies/services for young people from non-English speaking backgrounds:Programs/policies/services specifically for young women:Programs/policies/services specifically for young men:Library services for young people:Community – young people policies:Crime prevention:Sexual health counselling:Drug and alcohol programs/policies/services:Advisory services:At-risk programs:Outreach programs:

137

Welfare programs:

Accommodation (crisis/medium or long-term):

Curfews:

Recreation programs: Other young people programs/policies/services:

12b. Please describe any other young people specific programs/policies or services provided by your Local Government and indicate whether they are provided in-house or by contractor (s):

13a. Does your Local Government provide any program/policies/services that are not specifically for young people but are accessed by young people?

Yes

No

13b. If yes, your Local Government provides programs/policies/services that are not specifically for young people but are accessed by young people, does it provide any of the following services? (Tick as many as are applicable)

Leadership programs

Counselling services

Crime prevention programs/policies/services

Sexual health counselling

Drug and alcohol counselling/programs/services

Advisory services

Outreach programs

Welfare programs/policies/services

Accommodation (crisis and or medium/long-term)

Health services

Mental health services

Employment training services

Personal development programs

Arts/crafts programs

Drama/theatre programs

Sports programs

Recreation programs

Indigenous people programs/policies/services

People from NES background programs/policies/services

Women’s programs/policies/services

Men’s programs/policies/services

Library services

Appendices


13c. If your Local Government provides “Other programs/policies/services” that are not specifically for young people but are accessed by young people please describe them here:

14a. Does your Local Government employ any of the following officers who work with young people: (Tick as many as apply)

Youth workers

Youth development workers

Outreach workers

Youth disability officers

Youth employment officers

Recreation officers

Social workers

Migrant affairs officers

Arts/Drama activities officers

Sports officers

Recreation officers

Accommodation officers

Other program/policy/service officers working specifically with young people

14b. If your Local Government employs “Other young people program/policy/service related officers” please state their job title(s) here:

15a. What types of recreational facilities used by young people does your Local Government provide? (Tick as many as are applicable)

None

Tennis courts

Australian Rules football ovals

Soccer grounds

Rugby fields

Hockey fields

Basketball courts

Cricket grounds

Swimming pools

Skate parks

Ice-skating arenas

Roller-skating arenas

Meeting halls

Club rooms

Internet/email facilities

139

Libraries Community centres for young people BMX parksOther facilities

15b. If your Local Government provides “Other facilities” that are used by young people please list them here:

16a. Is your Local Government running any innovative programs/policies/services for young people that work well and could work elsewhere?

YesNo

16b. If yes, your Local Government is running innovative programs/policies/services for young people that work well and could work elsewhere please describe them here:

17. If your Local Government provides services that are specifically for young people would you be able to supply information (e.g. reports or brochures) about each service:

YesNo

18. If yes, you do have information, may we contact you to discuss communication of the information to us?

YesNo

Please return this survey to: Alan Charlton, Research Officer, Local Government and Young People Project, Institute for the Service Professions, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA 6027. For further information, contact Alan on Ph: 08 6304 5375, Fax: 08 6304 5387, Email: [email protected]

Copyright © 2003 [Edith Cowan University]. All rights reserved.

Appendices


Appendix 4

Interview schedule

Beginnings • Introductions • Outline of the research • Why their project was chosen • What will happen to the information • That they can choose to exit the process at any time • Check how much time they have • Ask them to sign consent form

1. Interviewee details • Name • Employer • Position • Permanence • Relationship to project: LGA employee, councillor, client, interested outsider, etc.

2. History of the initiative • Setting the scene • What were the key reasons for beginning the initiative? • What was the perceived community need? • Who noticed the need? e.g. was the need noticed by the LGA, the police, the

“community”, the young people, etc? • Was the need evidence-based, or was it theoretically/ideologically driven? e.g. strategic

decisions lead to this type of project or the need (from whatever perspective) leads to this project idiosyncratically

• Where and when did the work begin? • How long has the local government been involved in this work? • Who was initially involved? • What else was going on at the time?

3. Structural conditions • What is the organisational structure? • What “outside” forces (e.g. neighbours, government policy, politicians, media

campaigns) shape this initiative? • Any broad changes to government policy, funding have occurred? • What are the socio-economic conditions of the local area? e.g. unemployment, age

demographics, local economy, housing?

141

• What are the key issues facing young people in the area?

• What are the class, gender, cultural backgrounds of young people who are targeted by the council?

• What are the opportunity structures in the setting? i.e. future growth in the economy.

4. The project

Project Objectives • What are the objectives of the project?

• Do they/have they change/d?

• If so, why?

Project target • Which groups of young people are targeted and which groups get involved?

Project structures and procedures • Staff employed

• Training/qualifications/experience of staff

• Volunteers

• Relationship to LGA

• The work itself – what do you/they do?

Project assets • Buildings, etc. Owned outright, leased, supplied by LGA or other

• Equipment etc (or computers etc) ditto • Vehicles. Ditto

Project funding • Fed Govt, State/Territory Govt, LGA, outside, user-pays, what?

5. Participation • Does the project support young people’s participation?

• How does this project support young people’s participation in local government and/or community activities?

• In what ways do young people participate in the planning, management and running of the project?

• What are the barriers to youth participation?

6. Best practice

Project strategies • How would people describe their approach? i.e. community development, service work,

advocacy, support.

• What programs are offered? i.e. drop-in centre, outreach work, YACs, recreation facilities?

• What strategies have been tried?

Appendices


Best Practice • What do you mean by best practice? • How do you know when something is best practice? • What are some examples of best practice? • What gets in the way of best practice? • Can you think of an examples of “worst practice”?

7. Achievements

• Successful implementation – it did what we thought it would • It did other things – unexpected positive outcomes • Internal LGA change – changed/reflected change in LGA understanding/philosophy

Reasons for Success • What have been the key ingredients for success? • First attempt at this sort of thing • New personnel (in LGA council, LGA staff, project staff ) • Planning • Recognised real need and matched it • Why does this project work as opposed to: others like it, other projects in the LGA others in the past?

8. Problems, difficulties and lessons • Realising/noticing the need • Convincing [whoever] of the need • Staffing • Attracting clients/users etc • Problems inherent in the Project (it doesn’t/didn’t do what we thought it would) • What would you do differently? • What have you done differently this time around? • What lessons have you learnt from the project?

9. Organisation form and relationships • Who works in the setting? • How many people? • What kind of education, training and other credentialisms are used to recruit people? • What kind of professionals work in this setting? • How are organisations structured? • What about the organisation makes the work difficult?

10. Other work local government undertakes • What other youth projects does this local government undertake?

143

• How do these projects relate to the initiative under study?

(Try to get this info from documents rather than take up lots of time in interviews)

• Old reports

• Information brochures

• Formal evaluations

• Funding applications

• Policy documents

• Archives

• Newspaper collections

• Interview workers and managers

11. Stakeholder involvement

• Who are the key “players” or the relevant “community”?

• What organisations, interest groups, public figures actively collaborate with council in the work?

• Are there any competing interests/conflicts and how do these impact on the work?

• What alliances have been formed?

• Differing thoughts about how accountability might work with regard to different communities • Reactions from LGA – realistic or not

• Responses to/from users

12. Ideas and language

Also perhaps as the interview progresses keep a note of key words and ideas that areregularly used, e.g.

empowerment participation self-esteemcapacity building community at-risknetworking transitions resiliencecrime prevention offer information accessequity disadvantaged youth awareness

• What do people believe they ought to achieve?

• What are some of the key ideas and slogans?

• What kind of values are held?

• What ideas about youth is most popular in this setting, e.g. golden age, delinquents, problems, victims?

13. Growth, routinisation and decay

• What has happened over time?

• Have initiatives been taken up by others?

Appendices


• Have innovative approaches become conventional interventions? • Has the work lost popularity?

14. Monitoring and evaluation • How is the work evaluated? • Reasons for evaluation? • Who evaluates? • How successful is the work, according to whom and by what means of measurement? • Legal responsibilities • Fed/State/LGA requirement

REMEMBER: It is also worth keeping our eye on discrepancies, contradictions, tensionsand ambivalence

Appendix 5

Case study sitesThe GRIND newspaper, Darwin City Council, Northern Territory

Palmerston Public Library Young Adults Program, Palmerston City Council, Northern Territory

Public Spaces Protocol, Palmerston City Council, Northern Territory

The Longford Police Caution Project, Northern Midlands Municipal Council, Tasmania

FEWCHA and KAMELEON, Dorset Municipal Council, Tasmania

Hornsby Shire Council Youth Services, New South Wales

“About Jobs”, Cairns City Council, Queensland

The Messenger/Dreaming Project, City of Fremantle, Western Australia

Moonah Community Group, Moreland City Council, Victoria

Promoting Aboriginal Leadership in Schools, Campbelltown City Council, New South Wales

Frontyard Youth Services, Melbourne City Council, Victoria

Youth Development Model, Onkaparinga City Council, South Australia

Spinach web site, Adelaide City Council

ernment and local government young people, participation - murdoch university research ... · 2018....

Documents