Rethink youth development agenda

Delano Seiveright, Contributor

The front-page story of The Sunday Gleaner, January 23, titled 'Boot 'Babsy': youth leaders want portfolio shifted to education ministry', is an exaggeration, but it brings to the fore a number of issues surrounding youth development. I am certain that most Jamaicans were unaware of a 'National Youth Council' just as much as residents of Portmore are unaware of a 'Portmore Youth Council'. What many of us are aware of is the propensity for politics to slip into the halls of civil-society youth organisations. Notably, though, there should be no issue with a civil-society youth leader being involved with any political party as long as he is able to effectively separate his political views from representation of a non-partisan grouping.

SAD REALITY

A sad reality regarding discourse in Jamaica is the absence of logic and reason on far too many occasions. Discourse tends to lie heavily on emotion and 'gut feelings' rather than rationale. Youth issues discourse, over the years, tends to follow this trend. It is commonplace for discussion on youth issues to take place in isolation of critical matters including economic management, political history and justice. I have had countless experiences of youth leaders speaking glowingly on 'youth development' and an overwhelming desire to travel all over the world. The arguments tended to focus on redistributive ideas where, in essence, we must give a greater piece of a diminishing pie to the 'young people', oblivious of the extent of the economic crisis and the 'basket to carry water' reality for government ministers. Further yet promulgating the need for wealth creation, economic growth, mitigating bureaucracy, lowering and simplifying taxes and lowering interest rates are not usually issues of real concern.

A paradigm shift in thought is desperately needed. Some of our youth leaders need to step into the 21st century and open their eyes to the realities of a highly competitive and danger-fraught globalised world. Civil-society youth leaders have an incredible opportunity to be that 'third voice' in a highly polarised society. They must seek to establish strong organisations with clear and simple mandates with effective executive management and intense recruitment drives. They cannot continue to be mere paper groups waiting for that opportunity to travel, receive an award and engage in usually futile discussions. The truth is, youth leaders insufficiently utilise their platforms to advocate on a wide range of issues that have a direct impact on us, young people, including the economy, national security and education. Many of them have yet to pen a letter to the editor much less seek to engage in media interviews unless otherwise hunted down by news editors and producers. Once hunted down and seated, some more often than not go off on ill-informed tirades.

Further yet, over 10 years into the new millennium, some of our youth leaders have failed to engage with young people via social media outlets such as Facebook, Hi5 and Twitter. This I find particularly disturbing in light of the scores of young Jamaicans who become members of the social-media community daily.

POLICY REVIEW WELCOMED

With the National Youth Policy now under review, it marks a golden opportunity for fundamental change. The policy was developed in 2004 and activated in 2005 under the previous administration with a five-year lifespan and continued under the present government. The policy serves to facilitate the development of an environment that optimises the potential of each young Jamaican.

A critical area that requires fundamental reform is the existence of two major but similar government youth entities. They are the National Youth Service (NYS) and the National Centre for Youth Development (NCYD). Both institutions draw on tens of millions of dollars to function and it is patently obvious that with this duplication, financial and technical resources are not being effectively utilised. Additionally, the two agencies fall under different ministries. The NCYD falls under Ministry of Youth, Culture and Sports, while the NYS falls under the Ministry of Education. Some rationalisation is clearly needed.

SIMILAR FUNCTIONS?

The NYS, formed under the Michael Manley administration in 1973 and relaunched under the P.J. Patterson administration in 1995, is mandated to tackle youth issues, inclusive of high youth unemployment, academic underachievement, the lack of training opportunities, antisocial behaviour and make a meaningful impact on the number of unattached youth, who number more than 150,000.

The NCYD, formed under the Patterson administration in 2000, was established and serves as an institutional focal point to ensure effective coordination of, and collaboration on, youth-related programmes and research and also acts as an information clearing house.

It is obvious to any casual observer that having two youth entities with almost similar objectives on one hand, and the ability to merge functions on another, is a gross waste of tax dollars and ill-thought in the first place. This is even more so in an environment of severely constrained financial resources as a result of poor economic management in the past and a devastating global economic crisis over two years ago, of which we are still reeling from. The Public Sector Transformation Unit will hopefully make an obvious and welcomed recommendation.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Some recommendations worth considering include:

1. One central but nimble youth government agency with effective and seamless coordination with government ministries and agencies, including HEART Trust/NTA, Jamaica Constabulary Force and the Jamaica Defence Force.

2. Clear and simple mandates with more emphasis on vocational and social skills development for inner-city and disadvantaged youth.

3. Effective coordination with universities and other tertiary institutions in the development of youth-empowerment programmes for inner-city and disadvantaged youth. (The University of the West Indies should, for instance, consider compulsory involvement of students in youth development initiatives in conjunction with the central youth agency).

4. Continuation of the Government's approach to youth policy development by solidifying youth mainstreaming, rather than a narrow-minded and wasteful centralising of 'youth' programmes, whereby all government and non-government entities provide services for youth development based on their competencies.

5. Optimised utilisation of technology, including social media. It is a crying shame that the NYS and NCYD together have little presence on social media despite them being the Government's lead youth outfits. On Facebook alone, both entities have approximately 400 friends in total. There are also no text message and BlackBerry messenger systems in place.

6. More emphasis must be placed on promulgating the 'cool' factor for the youth initiatives. As such, marketing and public-relations efforts need fundamental reform to wow young people. Coordination with the marketing teams of the major telecommunications companies may be worthwhile and will undoubtedly be done free of cost.

7. The National Youth Council is clearly an excellent way of streamlining the many youth clubs across the island under one umbrella. Efforts in this area should be fast-tracked.

8. Youth leaders must be urged to contribute, on a sustained basis to discussions on national issues. If they are not capable, as some appear to be, appropriate replacements must be effected to ensure that young Jamaicans can benefit from reasoned, informed and cool-headed civil-society youth leadership.

9. Seek to curb mediocrity and place a renewed focus on quality over quantity.

Delano Seiveright is president of Generation 2000 (G2K), the young-professional affiliate of the Jamaica Labour Party.