YES: DARREN SNOW, manager, Crew Club, Brighton
Yes, it should be spent on larger youth clubs if it's new money. Existing provision should pay for existing clubs, whereas new money should be used for building new clubs. The sum of 40m is not enough, but it's a start.
If local authorities did pay for existing services and maintenance there could be lots more million-pound clubs and it will go a lot further.
I wouldn't want to see the money spent on lots of smaller clubs dropped everywhere. Local authorities should be carrying out maintenance on clubs otherwise new money will just get eaten up by maintenance costs.
It also depends on geographical areas, and should be based on catchment areas. For example, you would need to invest more in a busy urban area as it would attract more usage. If you've got 3,000 young people in an area you need to spend 3m to 5m. It also depends on whether the area is rural, because in some places there is a need for smaller clubs. We're having a new club built for 1m, which is paying for the building but not the internal equipment.
NO: ADRIAN SUMPTION, chair, Richmond Youth Partnership
The Youth Capital Fund should be spent on smaller youth clubs, because in Richmond, which is a large borough, we have some areas of relative deprivation and areas of poor youth provision, which we are constantly trying to improve.
We are in the process of trying to set up a youth cafe in a local park by transforming a derelict council building. We anticipate high numbers of customers for it, as it is next to a skateboarding park where a lot of young people congregate. It would give them a warm, more comfortable, place to go, and also give them access to services that youth workers can provide. We need to match the fund of 35,000 already given to us by the local authority and we will be applying for more youth capital funding, but a bigger problem is in revenue funding, which will be needed to keep it going.
NO: JOE GREEN, participation and engagement co-ordinator, Worcestershire County Council
I'd say no initially, because it is a decision that young people should be allowed to make themselves. You need to give the decision to young people on what facilities will be developed or you run the danger of building a new centre that no-one wants or uses.
A large part of Worcestershire is rural and there is very little youth provision in many areas. We are receiving about a quarter of a million from the Youth Capital Fund for this year and it may be that young people would like this to be spent on smaller projects to reach more areas, rather than just one or two large clubs. Of course, this raises the problem of how these can be sustained in future years.
We are putting together a management group of young people. They will be supported to make informed judgments and decide on the best way of using available funding - how they decide to use this afterwards will ultimately be up to them.
NO: BILL BADHAM, development officer, The National Youth Agency
It's difficult to say yes or no because the great thing about the Youth Capital Fund and Youth Opportunity Fund is that it's not up to adults to decide how the money is spent. Both funds are meant to be young people-led. Only young people can apply for grants and only young people can be the grant-makers. While they have told us they may want adult support, this cannot amount to us taking over and telling them how to spend the money. The Department for Education and Skills guidance is very clear about this.
From our consultation with young people on the two funds, they mainly felt that lots of small amounts of money spent on doing things and buying things would go a long way towards increasing things to do and places to go. They felt this could really help to overcome the main barriers they currently experience to do with cost, transport, the timing of activities and lack of information. The other main barrier they identified, which money can't buy, is the attitude of adults.
