Is new youth legislation needed?
Jan Cosgrove and Adam Muirhead
Tuesday, February 27, 2018
The IYW plans to get youth work on to a "statutory footing" to create a more "equitable" relationship with the government, but is that necessary when legislation already requires councils to secure provision?
YES
By Adam Muirhead, chair, the Institute for Youth Work (IYW)
While it is important to understand that there is already a statutory basis for youth work in Section 507b of the Education Act 1996, it is pertinent to recognise that no one actually cares. Even if the law is being properly considered, we are still dependent on a local authority itself determining "sufficiency" of provision, and how much is "reasonably practicable" in support for youth work/leisure-time activities.
Our piece of law is so limp that even when North Somerset Council was beaten in court in 2012 over its youth service cuts, it wasn't the "insufficiency" of the remaining youth work that won the day, but the lack of due process in consulting young people.
As if that wasn't bad enough, the cuts to services were not even reversed as the decision was tied up in the wider budget-making process, which could not be undone. The youth service was lost and, evidently, "our law" is not worth the paper it is written on.
So yes, we need new supportive legislation, but in what form? A new amendment? Powers to audit and enforce existing legislation? A whole Youth Work Act? Any truly supportive option necessarily means additional central government funding; it is clear to see that local authorities have all of the responsibility and none of the resource. The 2018/19 national budget for secondary education is £27.9bn; one per cent of this would equate to £279m, enough to kick-start a national youth work offer and its respective infrastructure.
Millions of young people would have access to bespoke curricula to meet the plethora of adolescent needs that exist outside of the National Curriculum's scope, across a broad age range and year round.
Let's just fantasise for a moment that this was possible; the main difficulty then would be whether to take "the king's shilling" and in so doing become full-on agents of the state. The youth work sector must first clearly and collectively articulate its practice and purpose and be robust enough to withstand potentially corrupting forces.
Increased protection of what we have through new legislation would be extremely welcome, but we must build up to that in a considered way. We must all work together to ensure this happens while the beating heart of purist youth work still exists throughout the UK.
NO
Jan Cosgrove, national secretary, Fair Play for Children
With the loss of over 600 youth projects and 3,500 youth work jobs, simply put, we do not have the luxury of campaigning for new legislation. Admirable sentiment, but remote. There is no glimmer of hope in terms of the government's legislative priorities, nor is it high on that of the other parties. The way forward is to use what exists - sections 507a, 507b and 508 of the Education Act 1996.
Section 507b is about the 13-plus age group - the main focus, one supposes, of IYW's plans. The 1996 Act also prescribes local authority duties for under-13s. There is statutory guidance on 13-plus but not for the under-13 group.
Many authorities seem to have breached this current law, in terms of providing "sufficient" services, relying on an apparent get-out, included in s507b, of doing what is "practicable". Perhaps this should be removed by a simple amendment to the legislation, a target for any government or private members' education bill.
Particularly vulnerable are those authorities that have missed consultation with young people, as proven in the North Somerset Council case.
The current neglect of what exists has led some councils to say that there is no statutory obligation. In the wake of proposed cuts at Brighton and Hove, I submitted a Freedom of Information request to the Department for Education. This - and the magnificent campaign from local young people - gave the council pause for thought. It accepted the provision is statutory.
My argument is that the statutory guidance around s507bneeds more teeth, and that there should be provision for adequate monitoring within the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. We need to highlight the emphasis in s508 on seeking involvement of the voluntary sector in delivering services - provision which has also been decimated by cuts. In West Sussex, where I live, there used to be 58 supported projects, mainly run by the voluntary sector, but this has now reduced to 16.
As for services for under-13s, including play, this is part of a continuum with 13-plus provision, not a poor relative. A good junior section in youth provision is insurance for survival in the future.
The approach suggested by Fair Play for Children does not rule out improved legislation, but emphasises using what there is as a potent tool.
