The Impact of Fourteen Years of UK Conservative Government Policy on Open Access Youth Work

Youth Pub Date : 2024-04-07 DOI:10.3390/youth4020034
Bernard Davies
{"title":"The Impact of Fourteen Years of UK Conservative Government Policy on Open Access Youth Work","authors":"Bernard Davies","doi":"10.3390/youth4020034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews the impacts of the UK Conservative Party’s government policies on ‘open access youth work’ since 2010, giving particular attention to the period since 2018 and to impacts in England. After clarifying the practice’s distinctive features, it outlines the ‘austerity’ demolition of its local provision and—amid continuing wider financial pressures—changes in the role and contributions of the voluntary youth sector. It lists a range of ‘gesture’ funds for financing responses to young people’s needs and interests as the government has defined them and uses the Youth Investment Fund (YIF) as a case study of how this money has been made available and allocated. Initiatives taken by the Department of Digital, Media, Culture and Sport (DCMS) are then examined: its Youth Review, National Youth Guarantee, review of the statutory guidance to local authorities, and support for ‘youth volunteering’. Two key developments are then considered that, by early 2024, were diverting and inhibiting an even partial sustained reinstatement of the lost open access youth work facilities. One, at the policy level, is the redefinition of ‘youth work’ by governments and by some within the youth work sector itself as a wide range of out-of-school practices with young people; the other, at the point of delivery, is the on-going difficulties in recruiting youth workers, especially those with direct practice experience. Finally, two possible tentative suggestions for some reinstatement of open access youth work provisions are then discussed.","PeriodicalId":507042,"journal":{"name":"Youth","volume":"12 17","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Youth","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/youth4020034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article reviews the impacts of the UK Conservative Party’s government policies on ‘open access youth work’ since 2010, giving particular attention to the period since 2018 and to impacts in England. After clarifying the practice’s distinctive features, it outlines the ‘austerity’ demolition of its local provision and—amid continuing wider financial pressures—changes in the role and contributions of the voluntary youth sector. It lists a range of ‘gesture’ funds for financing responses to young people’s needs and interests as the government has defined them and uses the Youth Investment Fund (YIF) as a case study of how this money has been made available and allocated. Initiatives taken by the Department of Digital, Media, Culture and Sport (DCMS) are then examined: its Youth Review, National Youth Guarantee, review of the statutory guidance to local authorities, and support for ‘youth volunteering’. Two key developments are then considered that, by early 2024, were diverting and inhibiting an even partial sustained reinstatement of the lost open access youth work facilities. One, at the policy level, is the redefinition of ‘youth work’ by governments and by some within the youth work sector itself as a wide range of out-of-school practices with young people; the other, at the point of delivery, is the on-going difficulties in recruiting youth workers, especially those with direct practice experience. Finally, two possible tentative suggestions for some reinstatement of open access youth work provisions are then discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英国保守党政府十四年来的政策对开放式青年工作的影响
本文回顾了自 2010 年以来英国保守党政府的政策对 "开放式青少年工作 "的影响,尤其关注了自 2018 年以来这一时期以及对英格兰的影响。在阐明了 "开放式青少年工作 "的显著特点后,文章概述了 "紧缩政策 "对其地方供给的破坏,以及在持续广泛的财政压力下,志愿青少年部门的角色和贡献发生的变化。报告列举了一系列 "姿态 "基金,用于资助满足政府所定义的青年需求和兴趣的活动,并以青年投资基金(YIF)为例,介绍了如何提供和分配这些资金。然后对数字、媒体、文化和体育部(DCMS)采取的措施进行了研究:青年审查、国家青年保障、对地方当局法定指南的审查以及对 "青年志愿服务 "的支持。然后,考虑到到 2024 年初,有两个关键的事态发展正在转移和阻碍甚至部分地持续恢复失去的开放式青年工作设施。其一,在政策层面,各国政府和青年工作部门内部的一些人将 "青年工作 "重新定义为与青 少年有关的一系列校外实践活动;其二,在实施层面,招聘青年工作者,特别是那些有直接 实践经验的青年工作者一直存在困难。最后,讨论了恢复开放式青年工作规定的两个可能的初步建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
European Youth Work Developments and Challenges—A Meta-Synthesis Comparison of External Load across Multi-Day Tournaments in Female Youth Volleyball Athletes Characteristics of Youth and Young Adults at Risk of Homelessness in the U.S. A Rapid Evidence Assessment of European Identity among Children, Adolescents and Young Adults The Care Trajectories and Nature of Care Received by Children Aged 5–11 Who Are in Need of Therapeutic Residential Care
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1