Our thanks to Chris for this feedback on the following PPE conference.
A personal synopsis of the Public Policy Exchange’s ‘Positive for Youth, Positive for Society: The Future of Youth Work’ 18th May 2016
Chris Warren – Adolescence group manager, Nottinghamshire County Council
• We must change from a position which campaigns to reduces closures, to a stance of ‘Talking Up’ what our engagement with young people has to benefit society as a whole and in particular those senior stake holders in Central and Local government .
• We need to create, and repeat, a narrative that assures current and future funders that they would be ‘missing a trick’, and damaging their portfolios, if they do not to support open access Youth Work.
• Creating a ‘why wouldn’t you’ rather than ‘why you should’ rhetoric around Youth Work.
• We must be clear when engaging providers, that the true voice of young people, through participation and co-production, rather than ‘box ticking’ consultation, adds value to their work.
• We must ‘stop moaning about’ the perceived success and funding of NCS (and this on the day that it became ‘statutory’ during the Queen’s speech) and fully engage with the programme to improve it, for the benefit of the young people.
• The hard work to gain ‘Scraps’ of funding from multitude of sources is better than the closure of provision that is often life changing to young people.
• We must move away from campaigning and lobbying and start a dialogue with senior politicians about how we can assist them to achieve ‘their’ outcomes, including value for money, through good quality long term youth work engaging groups of young people.
• We need to get smarter at describing the cost benefit analysis of Youth Work at the fore front of discussions/bids rather than stressing just the outcomes for young people.
If I can get my act together I’ll respond to the utterly misplaced, if utterly expected emphasis on cost benefit analysis.
” As the 18th century philosopher Immanuel Kant put it, some things have a price, or relative worth, while other things have a dignity, or inner worth. More than 200 years later, the categorical incompatibility remains as powerful as ever: The failure of cost-benefit analysis, in Kantian terms, stems from the attempt to weigh costs, which usually have a price, on the same scale as benefits, which often have a dignity.” (Frank Ackerman)
Any thoughts appreciated.