Are young people 'Angry, Violent and Abusive'?

Barnardos research has rekindled the old 'young people are animals' debate again, which hadn't really died down since the riots, and draconian sentences of a month ago or so, and before that, the rolling press coverage of various 'hoodie' related and other generally lazy 'children-are-not-what-they-used-to-be' stories.

In their survey they found that Almost half of Britons think young people are angry violent and abusive, with one in four thinking troubled children are beyond help by the age of 10. there was plenty of other equally scary stats (see Children behaving like animals, Barnardo's survey finds).

So which two thousand people did they ask?  Were any of them under 18?  Constant debate among (only) adults about changes in childhood is really rather dull and a bit meaningless.  It does however, reveal a far more interesting and useful question:

How much (and what quality of) social contact is there between younger and older people?

Going back to the figures, I'd really like to ask the 24% of people who thought those who behaved badly were beyond help by the age of 10.  How many of them have any meaningful relationship with any children?  I find it hard to believe anyone who lives or works with children (angels or bad boys) can possibly imagine any child being beyond help.

Looking to our politicians, have any come from troubled childhoods?  Boris Johnson, Dave Cameron and their Bullingdon Club mates have certainly done quite well despite, in their youth, trashing pubs and restaurants.  Even Cleggy, given his previous arson conviction, has done quite well.

Dave Cameron in his now famous 'hug a hoodie' speach, to the Centre for Social Justice founded by Iain Duncan Smith (not many under 18s there) says:

The first thing is to recognise that we'll never get the answers right unless we understand what's gone wrong...We - the people in suits - often see hoodies as aggressive, the uniform of a rebel army of young gangsters...

The complaints are identical.
Young people are out of control.
There's nothing for them to do.
Why can't their parents do their job properly?

...And if the phrase "social justice" is to be meaningful, it has to be about justice, as well as compassion and kindness.  It has to involve a sense of cause and consequence - of just rewards and just deserts.  One of the most important things we can teach our children is a sense of justice.'

The 'suits' is an interesting stereotype of his audience (their website certainly doesn't suggest that); The 'hoodies' in his speach remain a voiceless stereotype. When he talks of 'justice' all I can see screaming out is the injustice meted out everyday on young people by adults. ASBOs, mosquito alarms, and the recent use of heavy custodial sentences in the riots are obvious recent injustices, but they also model division between young and old, exasperating entrenched attitudes of young and old.

David Cameron goes on:

'Too often, the reality is that for "partnership" you can read "takeover."
If we're serious about the social sector doing more, then government and the public sector has to learn to let go.

There are two values at the heart of modern Conservatism.
Trusting people, and sharing responsibility.'

He was, of course, considering 'state' and 'private' sectors. However, if we make the leap to consider children themselves as part of a 'partnership', a trusting relationship, sharing responsibility, then we can look to real 'justice', and an opportunity for all of us to work together to challenge criminal behaviour and promote 'Big society' values.

Some examples of on-going collaborative work with young people in Birmingham:

 The Future Melting Pot  empower young people to achieve their potential through enterprise

Children's Lives -  Birmingham's Young People's Archive

No Postcode - Young people from the West Midlands has made a video to stop people joining gangs

Please add more you know about in comments.

Other links

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15568442

http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/half-think-youngsters-are-violent

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ueBCWaWNcY

http://johnault.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/the-bullingdon-club-boris-dave-and-gideon-yes-but-an-aspiring-liberal-mp-and-a-former-party-presdient-surely-not/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1542634/Cameron-as-leader-of-the-Slightly-Silly-Party.html
Cameron Hoodie speach

Valuing our Parks

BOSF annual conference is fantastic, and even though our little patch behind Kings Heath Community Centre is only just able to be called an 'open space', and our group a tiny bunch of parents with children under 5, we've got a lot from the five years we have been members of BOSF.  I was particularly interested to hear how young people were using Parks in light of the new charges levied.

Friends of Parks have been around for a few years, and have been an extremely successful initiative in engaging local people to use and care for their local parks.  The concept of our parks, parks belonging to us, is being re-assessed locally and nationally.  What changes should we expect - is Wandsworth Council leading the way by charging for use of playgrounds?

This year, at least, Councillor Mullaney (responsible for Parks in Brum) made it to BOSF annual conference, but seemed to have prepared his speech for the wrong audience.  Vandalism, joy-riding, graffiti and prostitution do happen in our parks, but BOSF priorities (and rest of discussion on the day) are in the use of parks for all, not the abuse by a minority.

It is interesting (and I think worrying) Mullaney says our golf courses will be privatised as they are a cost burden.  He suggested this will mean more money for parks.  How easy would it be for our parks to similarly be considered a cost burden? Mullaney makes clear he is still willing to negotiate with any private business or voluntary body that may provide cost savings for park up-keep.

I don't think Parks are in danger of being sold off completely.  What is more in question is how much consideration is given to supporting all park users, or valuing the skills of what's left of our park service staff.

Robin Bryan, Customer Liaison & Constituency Manager, alienated his audience.  Same as last year, he presented results from the flawed survey BOSF had helped Park Services complete, presented as 'fact' to tell his audience what we think, and that we are actually blissfully happy with the ever improving Parks Service.  But even in this topsy-turvy world of 'consultancy' and 'listening' there were some interesting statistics.

30% cuts in staff costs, but he says no effect on service provision?

Huge drop in schools using parks since introducing charges for schools, but he says service provision same as before?

Are these efficiency savings, or a reduction in provision to some of the most in need?  We need to monitor, question and challenge changes in our parks provision.

More than ever our Parks needs its Friends, and we need BOSF.

Related articles

• Anger as children charged to play (mirror.co.uk)
• You: Tory council to charge children £2.50 for using playground (guardian.co.uk)
• Priced out of the playground: Tory Wandsworth to charge kids to play (leftfootforward.org)
• Penny-pinching Tories now taxing childhood (mirror.co.uk)

The Big Lebowski and the Big Society

Sometimes everything you see seems connected.  Anyway, we watched the fantastic 'The Big Lebowski'  on LOVEfilm this weekend.

Jeff Lebowski, The Dude, the main man, is a 'bum', a slacker, living on Venice Beach, LA.  Vain, lazy and poor, yet somehow manages to be morally superior to the range of stinking rich characters who attempt to use him for their own ends.  Strangely enough, despite their less than wonderful character traits, the Dude and his bowling friends (the undeserving poor?) end up helping out all the others (the undeserving rich?), except the nihilists.  Film ends where it began, with friends still poor, still bowling.

Great film.