It’s fascinating how ideological positions can change when it suits. Thus, in addition to funding directly the National Citizen Service, the government is now coughing up £1.8 million to the National Volunteer Police Cadets. Evidently the State can intervene if it so desires, can forego the private and ignore the invisible hand of the market, especially in the case of its behavioural modification programmes. Ah, but you say, this intervention is to be monitored by the Middlesex University. The only snag is everybody seems to have made their minds up already.
Hence as CYPN reports:
Researchers at Middlesex University will spend the next two years evaluating the usefulness of the cadet programme and how it helps young people to develop and improve the way they feel about authority. [my emphasis]
Jeffrey DeMarco, research fellow in criminology and lead researcher at Middlesex University, said: “We’re very excited to be involved with this project.
“Young people can have difficult relationships with authority but becoming a cadet can improve community relations and prevent run-ins with the police.”
That’s an independent and critical starting point.
If you think £ 1.8 million on police cadets is expensive you clearly don’t know how much the taxpayer is paying for the MOD Cadets. £20 million per year on cadets in elite private schools is just the tip of the iceberg.
Government Youth Funding is as corrupt as FIFA, time to scrap the lot and start again.
Would that include the funding to youth united?
They were awarded £10m in 2014 and scouting was one of the key beneficiaries.
WHAT FOLLOWS IS A BITTER and TWISTED PERSONAL OPINION NOT THAT OF THE SCOUT ASSOCIATION>
Paul i am afraid it would have to.
Youth United is a strange hod podch of youth organisations not usually funded by LEA youth services, it includes the MOD cadets who already receive at least £100 million per year funding from the taxpayer and the scouts and guides who rely on voluntary funding from their local communities.
To put this in perspective, Youth United’s Scout funding was for Scout Groups in 20 of the most deprived communities, over six years it totalled £3.5 million (on my last enquiry) roughly the same as Kids Company was given AFTER it failed.
Meantime over the same period private and public school cadet forces received at least £120 million after successfully lobbying that their pupils could not possibly be expected to pay for their own uniforms and camps, (like every scout has to).
Given the pathetic amount received so far, Scout development projects could probably be carried by the rest of us UNTIL a fair and rational youth funding policy was worked out .
It would be interesting to see how long some of scouting’s critics commitment to young people lasted once their tax payer funded managerial salaries and middle class lifestyles disappeared.
My question is why do we need to spend 3.5 million to establish scouting in deprived areas?
If people in these areas felt scouting was needed they could start a scout group. Why not just fund some of the organisations already working in these areas?
Uniform groups seem to be part of the government strategy, presumably because they are seen as sharing the same vision!
A PERSONAL VIEW NOT THAT OF THE SCOUT ASSOCIATION.
Why fund any youth work in deprived areas ? I wonder how many of those existing organisations only exist because the taxpayer is made to pay for them ? As stated before I am quite happy to try the zero government funding option and see which youth provision is still voluntarily funded by the community after three years, providing every one from the Eton Cadets through LEA youth projects and outfits such as Kids Company do the same.
Your question is based on the assumption that scouting does not already exist in some of those areas, in a previous thread we have already seen how “professional” senior managers do not even know what voluntary organisations are called let alone where they operate.
Secondly it assumes there is not a demand for scouting in those areas, the assumption that certain economic and racial groups of young people are only interested in specific stereotypical activities needs to be constantly challenged.
With regard to methodology if you view the Better Prepared you tube slots you will observe that the work appears to be about empowering local people to establish groups not parachuting in people to establish things for them.
I am at a loss as regards government “strategy” in part it seems to be based on the findings of the 1970 cohort study with regards youth work summarised in Julia Margo and Sonia Sodha’s report Get Happy,
‘ Analysis of the 1970 cohort study has shown that some youth activities, such as sporting uniformed and church activities, were associated with positive adult outcomes by age 30, controlling for other relevant factors including outcomes up to age 10, while attendance at youth clubs was found to predict negative adult outcomes.’.
But then they go for the BIig Government options of competing with the Explorer Scout and Duke of Edinburgh Award programmes by Establishing the NCS. The community does not need yet another outdoor education/community work project for young people a properly funded and supported voluntary sector can do that. It does need professional youth workers providing issue based education and counselling.
Sorry Paul I meant to thank you for an intelligent question.