So you have seen a Skinny Twin production...
Isolating the Art from the Agenda: A review of Youth policy and a summation from State youth funded programs
By Simon Tengende
2009
Abstract
“Young people are our future…” A Sierra Leone community elder
Contents
1. Executive Summary
2. Why the Review
3. The Big picture-Values
4. Isolating the Agenda
5. The problematic and application of CCD principles
6. Conclusion
1 Executive Summary:
This review will examine the Victorian State Youth policy, Future Directions: An action agenda for young Victorians, rolled out through The Office for Youth, how it’s influenced by the State’s Policy, and it’s relation to the Federal Social Inclusion policy and Global Social Policy movements particularly the Social Inclusion Agenda.
As a Comparative Summation of the review, I will look at FReeZA and YPA, two programs rolled out across Victoria by The Office for Youth as part of Youth Participation Policy. This summation will help paint a picture of the practical engagement and outcomes of this action driven by funding informed by the youth policy.
It is important to note that FReeZA has been around for about thirteen years and was administered out of the Department of Human Services until the formation and transfer to The Office for Youth in 2000. The objectives of the two programs define the youth targeted but the outcomes paint an interesting picture in regards to the overarching agenda driving the funding and the outcomes reported and informing or not informing the policy ”cycle”.
Finally, I will explore the identified problematic as an argument for the introduction of CCD principles. It is also an opportunity to explore the dilemma I find myself in as an Artist who has worked with diverse communities and currently a “civil servant “ working in The Office for Youth.”
2. Why This Review?
1. Policy and Action: beyond the money, An examination of the Victorian Youth policy and some case studies of the policy in action
2. Culture and Policy:
Review key policy area and reflect in light of Field based project A and identify potential application of CCD praxis to a specific problematic
3. The Big Picture-Values
In government, values, constitute the highest consideration in mapping and framing policy, according to John Hawkes, “A society’s values are the basis upon which all else is built” this “ truth “ echoed by the Victorian Department of justice which points out that human rights should be at the core of an policy.1b A society that values itself will respect everyone, equally. On a global scale, in 1948, the general assembly of the United Nations signed The Universal Declaration of Human Rights paving the foundation of an ultimate reality to which all are entitled. This declaration is arguably the ultimate universal set of human values and is summarized in the Article stating, ” All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights” . This poses an interesting platform to explore how policy is informed and whom it serves.
On a local level, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has somewhat influenced the shaping of the Victoria Human Rights Charter Act 2006 which is aptly summarized as,” one simple but important law that sets out our freedoms, rights and …”3. The fact that the charter is less than 3 years old should then mean that prior; the universal human rights did apply or informed policy makers in the space of universal values.
The department of justice website clearly outlines what the charter of Human rights in Victoria means or should mean for civil servants/ policy makers,” The Charter imposes obligations on public authorities to consider relevant human rights when making a decision. The Charter also requires public authorities to act in a manner that is compatible with human rights.”4 It is then important to note that in Future directions: An action agenda for Young Victorians, makes no refer to any of the Universal human rights nor Victorian Charter, but the influence is definitely evident. It would have been interesting to note in this review some form of direct reference made in Youth Policy to human rights, purely because it would have alighted policy makers not as isolated, unreachable entities tucked away somewhere within bureaucracy without “engaging” with the outside world.
4.0 Isolating the Agenda:
4.1 What is Policy?
4.2 The office for Youth
4.3 Respect
4.4 Future Directions
4.5 A Fairer Victoria
4.2. 1 Social Inclusion
4.2.2 Social Exclusion
4.2.3 Social Capital
4.3.1 Arts in Action
4. 3.1 FReeZA
4.3.2 YPA
4.0 Isolating the Agenda
4.1 What is Policy?
From the Policy booklets, Future Directions and RESPECT, the Definition of Policy seems to be used broadly. Future Directions booklet cover seems to point to a statement/s as the policy, but is not referenced inside as indicated on the cover. Respect on the other hand talks about policy frameworks as the policy.
Three definitions of policy does arrest my interest and are worth noting here, the first is on Wiki," A policy is typically described as a deliberate plan of action to guide decisions and achieve rational outcome (s). ... “1 This definition seems to cover the intentions of the Youth Policy under review, the second definition state,” A plan or course of action, especially one of an organization or government; A course of action thought to be prudent or tactically advantageous; hence prudence or sagacity; A statement of commitment to a broad requirement, often used in an organisation to instruct personnel as to a required...”2 this policy definition seems to try to be broad and inclusive of what policy is and somewhat succeeds in capturing the key word I have encountered around what policy means. The definition though that seems to apply to this paper is one offered by a Policy principal in the office for youth who I will refer to as anonymous, “A policy is a statement of intent and is followed by an action to fulfill it usually an election promise which can always be lost in other more important things ” This seems to be echoed by the overwhelming information within the Youth Policy documents (Future directions and respect) outlining all the achievements of the government in Office.
4.2 The Office for Youth
The Future Directions policy sits within The Office for Youth, which was established in 2000, it has loose ties with the Federal government Office for youth in Canberra. The Office for Youth currently sits within the Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD). The department has a policy team (DPT) as well as the Youth Participation Team YPT), which looks after the youth programs funded, from the Office across Victoria. This review simply looks at the youth policy (Future Directions) formulated by DPT and how it’s translated into action through programs managed in YPT.
The office for youth arguably has the most interesting portfolio seeing the issues that youth are currently facing in Victoria, Australia and across the world in general. The State of Young people report in 2009 presents a grim picture of how the lives of young people are penning out such as 1 in 4 is has a mental illness.1 This example means the policy maker do have to engage appropriately with the outcomes of the engagement with young people including results from interface programs across Victoria. Hence the importance of the comparative summation of FReeZA and YPA programs funded through the Office for Youth.
4.3 RESPECT
The Government’s Vision for young Victorians is the predecessor to Future Directions. It was the first Youth Policy in Victoria since the establishment of the Office for Youth in 2000. The policy can be best summarized in the introduction from the former premier John Bracks, “ this commitment is clearly articulated in this document and is a commitment based on respect; respect for young people themselves, for their diverse needs aspirations and interests and for the many and varied contributions they make to the community”2 Unlike Future Directions, the Respect policy does point out young peoples participation in the arts and cultural activities through the development of a new policy for the arts in victoria which is now in place through Arts Victoria and I will briefly review later.
4.4 Future Directions
An action agenda for Young Victorians is a follow on from an earlier youth Policy, RESPECT: The Government’s vision for Young People.
Future directions: outlines the current Youth Policy in Victoria; this agenda is closely linked to the Victoria government policy. According to James Merlino, the Minister who looks after the youth portfolio, “ Future Directions outlines the things we plan to do for all Young Victorians over the next four years”1 It outlines about 5 outcomes which the government cites will be realised through the funding of about 40 initiatives. The 40 intentions outlined within the “policy” are statements that outline areas where the government will spend money, Further review also indicates the 5 desired outcomes seem to be the policies as they appear as the “statements of intent” for example,” Future Directions will increase the number of young people who contribute more to their communities and want to make a difference”. This policy is interesting in how it’s framed as it sets up the problematic with this policy where the policy makers and government in this instance seem more interested in a number than the process, the young people’s stories and other community and residual benefits that cannot be captured by,” increasing the number”. On further review, if the 5 desired outcomes in Future Directions are overlaid with,” Future Directions will increase the number of young people who..” 2 As CCD practitioner, it poses a serious question of how policy makers are supposed to be informed by figures in regards to a funded process. And does this mean all other outcomes form secondary evidence that is not used or necessary?
4.2.1 Social Inclusion
Future directions, is clearly informed by the Commonwealth Government’s Social Inclusion agenda which is more explored as a policy in A Fairer Victoria. The policy definitely has a strong influence from the Social Inclusion agenda and references using the terminology of the agenda. .As Future Directions comes from A Fairer Victoria policy framework, it is important to note that in A Fairer Victoria policy introduction, its intent is outlined by the Minister Peter Batchelor who states the policy, “is determined to shape a more inclusive society, “3 he goes on to state that, “ fairness is also about social inclusion” linking it to the Commonwealth government Social Inclusion Agenda for Aiustralia.4
The Commonwealth Government Social Inclusion agenda is led by Julia Gillard and has a dedicated website as a resource. The policy deals with the identified areas of common exclusion and the policy is a follow on from an election promise.
Globally, the Social Inclusion agenda did gain momentum under Tony Blair’s labour party; Blair recognised that the old welfare state approach of creating a social safety net was out of date, He realised that just giving people more money wasn’t enough. The idea was to build people’s capacities so they could participate meaningfully in the mainstream economy, and to bring excluded communities back into the life of the nation. 1 The policy looked at exclusion causes such as unemployment, family breakdown etc and tailor made solutions to them. The resulting programs focused not only on learning and skills acquisition, but also on the building of trust, social capital, neighbourhood strengthening and the pursuit of
the active Society. To welfare rights was added the right to meaningful participation, this is the idea behind the Commonwealth Social Inclusion agenda and the policy agenda that the Vice MP leads including the website modelled around the Social Exclusion unit that reported directly to the Prime Minister’s office in the UK. This UK movement in 1999 influenced the European Social and Economic integrated reporting goals for member states, ironically elevating Social inclusion to the centre of the European Union Economic policy
4.2.2 Social Exclusion
To understand what informs Social Inclusion, the term Social Exclusion was been anointed as the starting point from when the UK government mapped its Social Inclusion agenda. Thus to reflect on the Social Inclusion agenda, it is worthwhile to start off with Social Exclusion which Ali Madanipour defines as , ” Social exclusion is defined as a multi-dimensional process, in which various forms of exclusion are combined: participation in decision making and political processes, access to employment and material resources, and integration into common cultural processes. When combined, they create acute forms of exclusion that find a spatial manifestation in particular neighborhoods.”10 This definition highlights the difference points of reference such as employment, which A Fairer Victoria and Future Directions highlight as areas needing stimulus and investment. It also highlights that Social Inclusion as an agenda targets particular neighbourhoods and communities justifying most of the outlined in Future Directions such as Education, skills and English as second language for Refugee young people.
4.2.3 Social Capital
Closely linked to Social exclusion and Inclusion is Social Capital, the Social Capital definition from the University of Flinders states, “ Social capital refers to the connections, trust and reciprocity between individuals and within communities, and the resources that can arise from these connections, Including employment, or educational opportunities for individuals and cohesion and a sense of safety in communities.”11 The definitions of Social Exclusion and Social Capital strongly paints a picture of Social Inclusion that Future Directions is working to, where it seems to falls short is it’s seeming disregard for genuine, real and positive changes that this policy through it’s various “enablers” generates. The fascination with “numbers” by government/ policy makers presents a huge problematic to me as an Artist who has worked in the community as well as being the program manager for FReeZA. The following summary paints a picture of the extent of FReeZA and YPA in engaging young people through the Arts across Victoria
4.3.1 Arts in Action
The Youth Participation team in The Office for Youth looks after programs rolled out across Victoria to engage young people to achieve the outcomes outlined within the current Youth Policy, Future directions. The Arts are an integral aspect of the youth engagement leading to outcomes that reflect the “success” of the investment in the action as an extension of the Policy.
4.3.2 FReeZA
FReeZA is a Music, Artistic and Cultural program engaging young people across Victoria to plan and stage events for their peers. It has been around for about 13 years. FReeZA was moved to The Office for Youth in 2000 after being administered in the Department of Human Services since the first pilot 1996. Its objectives has been aligned with the Respect and Future Directions agenda respectively resulting in its evolvement into “an inclusive and diverse” program in regards to events and young people participating in it.
FReeZA is a $4million dollar program dedicated to funding Artistic, Cultural and Music events such as Band events, Theatre Performances, Art exhibitions and dance showcases. Of all the Artistic and cultural processes leading to these events, the only measure that the policy makers/government through the DPT report on through the BP3, (Budget Paper 3) attendance numbers and events numbers held in a given period.
In 2008, 145,000 young people participated in a FReeZA event across Victoria, the residual benefits could range from better mental well being, a night away from alcohol as events are alcohol, smoke and drug-free, and contributing to cultural life of their community. The process of planning and leading the staging of events as well as performing for young Victorians aged between 14- 25 and the above mentioned benefits are somehow overlooked or underplayed in their significance in government reporting.
4.3.3 Youth Participation and Access Program
This program was designed to help built strong, resilient and active communities by giving support to young people who are disengaged from, or face additional barriers to, participation in community life and is funded through the Office for youth11. YPA has many outcomes but providers report significant Arts based outcomes across Victoria including,
The Kildonan Awesome Art Exhibition and competition in Whittlesea
2-The Ghet Go R&B dancing and breaking in Moonee Valley
3-Aiming high Art project I Gippsland
4-Kulcha Shift Shop in Warrnambool (Art Music and Dance)
5-Xpress Youth Action in Bendigo (Visual Art)
6-Canvass Arts for Vietnamese youth
7-Y-Glam performing arts program
FReeZA has on average 480 Arts based events reported in Victoria over a year whilst YPA report about half of those. In summary, of the approx $7 million dollars spend ever two years in YPA and FReeZA, the bulk of this goes to supporting young Victorians making and taking part in Artistic, Cultural and Music events.
5 The Problematic
5.3.1 A diverse range of events and individual stories come out of these two programs which could humanise Policy informing the policy makers directly by attending showcases or by perusing artefacts. It paints a picture of a broken cycle where Values inform policy, which forms the rationale for spending through programs where the breakdown happens.
5.3.2 the program outcomes does feed back into the program but do not complete the cycle to fully inform the policy making process. The figures captured for reporting dehumanises the actions and fails to capture the essence explored by the process of making and presenting the Art which government funds. This is a point where as an Artist CCD methods of evaluation can be introduced.
5.3.3 the introduction of the CCD based processes to engage with young people through art to explore the possibilities for measuring the program outputs would have significant benefits to the policy area. This would be informing the policymaking process from below rather than the current top down. Instead of celebration of bureaucrat’s work, the engagement of young people can be given the rightful space to inform.
5.3.4 In relation to my project proposed in Field Based Project B, Working with young African males utilising the public space in Footscray, it would be an opportunity, under the policy Future Directions to be resources by government to work explore Forum Theatre as a process of engaging and exploring issues of Social Exclusion. How inspiring and empowering would it be for these young Africans and if the project was resourced and informative for policy makers if they came to the performances and engaged with the concept as a way of collating the outcomes instead of just counting the presentation from some remote office as one event?
5.1 The Questions
1. What is my role as a professional artist working in the community, in supporting the community using CCD/Artistic process to inform and influence policy?
2. Are policy makers really engaging with community outcomes or the young people and their communities are being done a disservice by the government by the lack of proper engagement or lack of accurate measurement of participation in state funded programs?
2. Could Policy Makers defer the authority to young people to determine how their participation is measured in state funded programs?
3. Arts and culture are at the centre of Youth policy, they are the most significantly resourced action. How can Artists and participants be at the core of determining how the outcomes inform the Action agenda for Young Victorians?
5.2 Rationale
There seems to be a space for arguing the rationale for exploring how the process of engaging young people through the Arts in funded programs can better be evaluated and inform policy makers and policy. The clear assumption of course is that the process can be principled by applying an expertise, CCD in this case. This is definitely a step forward in introducing more accountability of Youth policy as examined in this review. It also is an opportunity to reflect on the processes at play through the program that have meaning in changing peoples lives, however, the other rationale that could be put in place is the appreciation without exposing the processes at play. Art is alive, and let people see it for themselves without someone picking it out for all to see. But then, this is reporting in essence, you isolate and highlight, will then showcasing and engaging with the Art/facts be better in policy makers being informed and influenced by a process that cannot be named? Or disciplined?
The current report of outcomes within the programs reviewed also point to an interesting linkage, According to the principles cited by Adams and Goldbard as guiding the principles of ccd workers, “ Active participation in cultural life is an essential goal of ccd” 1Applying to the current reporting on the outcomes of programs reviewed translating the Future Directions policy into community engagement, the figures collected for reporting, such as number of young people participating in FReeZA events could rationally be argued as representing the figure of “young active participants” in cultural life. Active and participation as words present their own problematic as John Hawke points out,” A lot of government material runs fast and loose with this word”1too right.
Finally
6 Conclusion
4.1 In reviewing the public Youth Policy, Future Directions, it is evident that a careful introduction of CCD principles in the form Arts based evaluation methods for the policy driven programs would result in a completion of a policy cycle where the policy in theory is informed by the policy in Action.
Bibliography
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy, accessed 20/10/09,
http://www.wiktionary.org/, accessed 18/10/09
http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/accessed, 10/10/09
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a1, accessed 10/10/09
www.equalopportunitycommission.vic.gov.au/human20%, accessed, 1/10/09
www.yacvic.org.au/aboutus/items/ accessed 11/09/09
www.dpcd.vic.gov.au, accessed 20/10/09
Flinders University, (2009) Practical Social Capital: A policy Briefing, Flinders University Publishing, South Australia
Pierre-Marc D and Jacob S, (2009) Toward Accurate Measurement of Participation: Rethinking the Conceptualization and Operationalization of Participatory Evaluation, American Journal of Evaluation, Sage publications
Nicholson, Tony, (2007), A New Australian Model of Social Inclusion and employment Services, Brotherhood of St Laurence
hawkes, John, (2003) , article for Artwork, Community Cultural Development according to Adams and Goldbard, Issue #56
Department of Victorian Communities, Future Directions: An Action Agenda for Young Victorians, Published by the state government, Victoria, Melbourne
State of Victoria, (2002) RESPECT: The Government ‘s Vision for Young People, Published by the state government, Victoria, Melbourne
State of Victoria, (2009) A Fairer Victoria-Standing together through tough times ,Published by the state government, Victoria, Melbourne
Hawkes, John, (2001), The fourth Pillar of sustainability, Cultural Development Inc
Althaus, Catherine; Bridgman, Peter and Davis, Glyn, (2007), The Australian Policy Handbook (4thed). Sydeny;Allen &Unwin
Madanipour, Ali et. al. (1998), Social Exclusion in European Cities: Processes, Experiences and Responses, (eds) London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers Ltd
Aber Lawrence, (2009), Experiments in 21st century antipoverty policy, Public Policy Research, University of New York
PACA, (2009), Overview of the Victorian State Budget Papers 2009, Initiatives for PACA groups, Department of Planning and Community Development
2009
Abstract
“Young people are our future…” A Sierra Leone community elder
Contents
1. Executive Summary
2. Why the Review
3. The Big picture-Values
4. Isolating the Agenda
5. The problematic and application of CCD principles
6. Conclusion
1 Executive Summary:
This review will examine the Victorian State Youth policy, Future Directions: An action agenda for young Victorians, rolled out through The Office for Youth, how it’s influenced by the State’s Policy, and it’s relation to the Federal Social Inclusion policy and Global Social Policy movements particularly the Social Inclusion Agenda.
As a Comparative Summation of the review, I will look at FReeZA and YPA, two programs rolled out across Victoria by The Office for Youth as part of Youth Participation Policy. This summation will help paint a picture of the practical engagement and outcomes of this action driven by funding informed by the youth policy.
It is important to note that FReeZA has been around for about thirteen years and was administered out of the Department of Human Services until the formation and transfer to The Office for Youth in 2000. The objectives of the two programs define the youth targeted but the outcomes paint an interesting picture in regards to the overarching agenda driving the funding and the outcomes reported and informing or not informing the policy ”cycle”.
Finally, I will explore the identified problematic as an argument for the introduction of CCD principles. It is also an opportunity to explore the dilemma I find myself in as an Artist who has worked with diverse communities and currently a “civil servant “ working in The Office for Youth.”
2. Why This Review?
1. Policy and Action: beyond the money, An examination of the Victorian Youth policy and some case studies of the policy in action
2. Culture and Policy:
Review key policy area and reflect in light of Field based project A and identify potential application of CCD praxis to a specific problematic
3. The Big Picture-Values
In government, values, constitute the highest consideration in mapping and framing policy, according to John Hawkes, “A society’s values are the basis upon which all else is built” this “ truth “ echoed by the Victorian Department of justice which points out that human rights should be at the core of an policy.1b A society that values itself will respect everyone, equally. On a global scale, in 1948, the general assembly of the United Nations signed The Universal Declaration of Human Rights paving the foundation of an ultimate reality to which all are entitled. This declaration is arguably the ultimate universal set of human values and is summarized in the Article stating, ” All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights” . This poses an interesting platform to explore how policy is informed and whom it serves.
On a local level, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has somewhat influenced the shaping of the Victoria Human Rights Charter Act 2006 which is aptly summarized as,” one simple but important law that sets out our freedoms, rights and …”3. The fact that the charter is less than 3 years old should then mean that prior; the universal human rights did apply or informed policy makers in the space of universal values.
The department of justice website clearly outlines what the charter of Human rights in Victoria means or should mean for civil servants/ policy makers,” The Charter imposes obligations on public authorities to consider relevant human rights when making a decision. The Charter also requires public authorities to act in a manner that is compatible with human rights.”4 It is then important to note that in Future directions: An action agenda for Young Victorians, makes no refer to any of the Universal human rights nor Victorian Charter, but the influence is definitely evident. It would have been interesting to note in this review some form of direct reference made in Youth Policy to human rights, purely because it would have alighted policy makers not as isolated, unreachable entities tucked away somewhere within bureaucracy without “engaging” with the outside world.
4.0 Isolating the Agenda:
4.1 What is Policy?
4.2 The office for Youth
4.3 Respect
4.4 Future Directions
4.5 A Fairer Victoria
4.2. 1 Social Inclusion
4.2.2 Social Exclusion
4.2.3 Social Capital
4.3.1 Arts in Action
4. 3.1 FReeZA
4.3.2 YPA
4.0 Isolating the Agenda
4.1 What is Policy?
From the Policy booklets, Future Directions and RESPECT, the Definition of Policy seems to be used broadly. Future Directions booklet cover seems to point to a statement/s as the policy, but is not referenced inside as indicated on the cover. Respect on the other hand talks about policy frameworks as the policy.
Three definitions of policy does arrest my interest and are worth noting here, the first is on Wiki," A policy is typically described as a deliberate plan of action to guide decisions and achieve rational outcome (s). ... “1 This definition seems to cover the intentions of the Youth Policy under review, the second definition state,” A plan or course of action, especially one of an organization or government; A course of action thought to be prudent or tactically advantageous; hence prudence or sagacity; A statement of commitment to a broad requirement, often used in an organisation to instruct personnel as to a required...”2 this policy definition seems to try to be broad and inclusive of what policy is and somewhat succeeds in capturing the key word I have encountered around what policy means. The definition though that seems to apply to this paper is one offered by a Policy principal in the office for youth who I will refer to as anonymous, “A policy is a statement of intent and is followed by an action to fulfill it usually an election promise which can always be lost in other more important things ” This seems to be echoed by the overwhelming information within the Youth Policy documents (Future directions and respect) outlining all the achievements of the government in Office.
4.2 The Office for Youth
The Future Directions policy sits within The Office for Youth, which was established in 2000, it has loose ties with the Federal government Office for youth in Canberra. The Office for Youth currently sits within the Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD). The department has a policy team (DPT) as well as the Youth Participation Team YPT), which looks after the youth programs funded, from the Office across Victoria. This review simply looks at the youth policy (Future Directions) formulated by DPT and how it’s translated into action through programs managed in YPT.
The office for youth arguably has the most interesting portfolio seeing the issues that youth are currently facing in Victoria, Australia and across the world in general. The State of Young people report in 2009 presents a grim picture of how the lives of young people are penning out such as 1 in 4 is has a mental illness.1 This example means the policy maker do have to engage appropriately with the outcomes of the engagement with young people including results from interface programs across Victoria. Hence the importance of the comparative summation of FReeZA and YPA programs funded through the Office for Youth.
4.3 RESPECT
The Government’s Vision for young Victorians is the predecessor to Future Directions. It was the first Youth Policy in Victoria since the establishment of the Office for Youth in 2000. The policy can be best summarized in the introduction from the former premier John Bracks, “ this commitment is clearly articulated in this document and is a commitment based on respect; respect for young people themselves, for their diverse needs aspirations and interests and for the many and varied contributions they make to the community”2 Unlike Future Directions, the Respect policy does point out young peoples participation in the arts and cultural activities through the development of a new policy for the arts in victoria which is now in place through Arts Victoria and I will briefly review later.
4.4 Future Directions
An action agenda for Young Victorians is a follow on from an earlier youth Policy, RESPECT: The Government’s vision for Young People.
Future directions: outlines the current Youth Policy in Victoria; this agenda is closely linked to the Victoria government policy. According to James Merlino, the Minister who looks after the youth portfolio, “ Future Directions outlines the things we plan to do for all Young Victorians over the next four years”1 It outlines about 5 outcomes which the government cites will be realised through the funding of about 40 initiatives. The 40 intentions outlined within the “policy” are statements that outline areas where the government will spend money, Further review also indicates the 5 desired outcomes seem to be the policies as they appear as the “statements of intent” for example,” Future Directions will increase the number of young people who contribute more to their communities and want to make a difference”. This policy is interesting in how it’s framed as it sets up the problematic with this policy where the policy makers and government in this instance seem more interested in a number than the process, the young people’s stories and other community and residual benefits that cannot be captured by,” increasing the number”. On further review, if the 5 desired outcomes in Future Directions are overlaid with,” Future Directions will increase the number of young people who..” 2 As CCD practitioner, it poses a serious question of how policy makers are supposed to be informed by figures in regards to a funded process. And does this mean all other outcomes form secondary evidence that is not used or necessary?
4.2.1 Social Inclusion
Future directions, is clearly informed by the Commonwealth Government’s Social Inclusion agenda which is more explored as a policy in A Fairer Victoria. The policy definitely has a strong influence from the Social Inclusion agenda and references using the terminology of the agenda. .As Future Directions comes from A Fairer Victoria policy framework, it is important to note that in A Fairer Victoria policy introduction, its intent is outlined by the Minister Peter Batchelor who states the policy, “is determined to shape a more inclusive society, “3 he goes on to state that, “ fairness is also about social inclusion” linking it to the Commonwealth government Social Inclusion Agenda for Aiustralia.4
The Commonwealth Government Social Inclusion agenda is led by Julia Gillard and has a dedicated website as a resource. The policy deals with the identified areas of common exclusion and the policy is a follow on from an election promise.
Globally, the Social Inclusion agenda did gain momentum under Tony Blair’s labour party; Blair recognised that the old welfare state approach of creating a social safety net was out of date, He realised that just giving people more money wasn’t enough. The idea was to build people’s capacities so they could participate meaningfully in the mainstream economy, and to bring excluded communities back into the life of the nation. 1 The policy looked at exclusion causes such as unemployment, family breakdown etc and tailor made solutions to them. The resulting programs focused not only on learning and skills acquisition, but also on the building of trust, social capital, neighbourhood strengthening and the pursuit of
the active Society. To welfare rights was added the right to meaningful participation, this is the idea behind the Commonwealth Social Inclusion agenda and the policy agenda that the Vice MP leads including the website modelled around the Social Exclusion unit that reported directly to the Prime Minister’s office in the UK. This UK movement in 1999 influenced the European Social and Economic integrated reporting goals for member states, ironically elevating Social inclusion to the centre of the European Union Economic policy
4.2.2 Social Exclusion
To understand what informs Social Inclusion, the term Social Exclusion was been anointed as the starting point from when the UK government mapped its Social Inclusion agenda. Thus to reflect on the Social Inclusion agenda, it is worthwhile to start off with Social Exclusion which Ali Madanipour defines as , ” Social exclusion is defined as a multi-dimensional process, in which various forms of exclusion are combined: participation in decision making and political processes, access to employment and material resources, and integration into common cultural processes. When combined, they create acute forms of exclusion that find a spatial manifestation in particular neighborhoods.”10 This definition highlights the difference points of reference such as employment, which A Fairer Victoria and Future Directions highlight as areas needing stimulus and investment. It also highlights that Social Inclusion as an agenda targets particular neighbourhoods and communities justifying most of the outlined in Future Directions such as Education, skills and English as second language for Refugee young people.
4.2.3 Social Capital
Closely linked to Social exclusion and Inclusion is Social Capital, the Social Capital definition from the University of Flinders states, “ Social capital refers to the connections, trust and reciprocity between individuals and within communities, and the resources that can arise from these connections, Including employment, or educational opportunities for individuals and cohesion and a sense of safety in communities.”11 The definitions of Social Exclusion and Social Capital strongly paints a picture of Social Inclusion that Future Directions is working to, where it seems to falls short is it’s seeming disregard for genuine, real and positive changes that this policy through it’s various “enablers” generates. The fascination with “numbers” by government/ policy makers presents a huge problematic to me as an Artist who has worked in the community as well as being the program manager for FReeZA. The following summary paints a picture of the extent of FReeZA and YPA in engaging young people through the Arts across Victoria
4.3.1 Arts in Action
The Youth Participation team in The Office for Youth looks after programs rolled out across Victoria to engage young people to achieve the outcomes outlined within the current Youth Policy, Future directions. The Arts are an integral aspect of the youth engagement leading to outcomes that reflect the “success” of the investment in the action as an extension of the Policy.
4.3.2 FReeZA
FReeZA is a Music, Artistic and Cultural program engaging young people across Victoria to plan and stage events for their peers. It has been around for about 13 years. FReeZA was moved to The Office for Youth in 2000 after being administered in the Department of Human Services since the first pilot 1996. Its objectives has been aligned with the Respect and Future Directions agenda respectively resulting in its evolvement into “an inclusive and diverse” program in regards to events and young people participating in it.
FReeZA is a $4million dollar program dedicated to funding Artistic, Cultural and Music events such as Band events, Theatre Performances, Art exhibitions and dance showcases. Of all the Artistic and cultural processes leading to these events, the only measure that the policy makers/government through the DPT report on through the BP3, (Budget Paper 3) attendance numbers and events numbers held in a given period.
In 2008, 145,000 young people participated in a FReeZA event across Victoria, the residual benefits could range from better mental well being, a night away from alcohol as events are alcohol, smoke and drug-free, and contributing to cultural life of their community. The process of planning and leading the staging of events as well as performing for young Victorians aged between 14- 25 and the above mentioned benefits are somehow overlooked or underplayed in their significance in government reporting.
4.3.3 Youth Participation and Access Program
This program was designed to help built strong, resilient and active communities by giving support to young people who are disengaged from, or face additional barriers to, participation in community life and is funded through the Office for youth11. YPA has many outcomes but providers report significant Arts based outcomes across Victoria including,
The Kildonan Awesome Art Exhibition and competition in Whittlesea
2-The Ghet Go R&B dancing and breaking in Moonee Valley
3-Aiming high Art project I Gippsland
4-Kulcha Shift Shop in Warrnambool (Art Music and Dance)
5-Xpress Youth Action in Bendigo (Visual Art)
6-Canvass Arts for Vietnamese youth
7-Y-Glam performing arts program
FReeZA has on average 480 Arts based events reported in Victoria over a year whilst YPA report about half of those. In summary, of the approx $7 million dollars spend ever two years in YPA and FReeZA, the bulk of this goes to supporting young Victorians making and taking part in Artistic, Cultural and Music events.
5 The Problematic
5.3.1 A diverse range of events and individual stories come out of these two programs which could humanise Policy informing the policy makers directly by attending showcases or by perusing artefacts. It paints a picture of a broken cycle where Values inform policy, which forms the rationale for spending through programs where the breakdown happens.
5.3.2 the program outcomes does feed back into the program but do not complete the cycle to fully inform the policy making process. The figures captured for reporting dehumanises the actions and fails to capture the essence explored by the process of making and presenting the Art which government funds. This is a point where as an Artist CCD methods of evaluation can be introduced.
5.3.3 the introduction of the CCD based processes to engage with young people through art to explore the possibilities for measuring the program outputs would have significant benefits to the policy area. This would be informing the policymaking process from below rather than the current top down. Instead of celebration of bureaucrat’s work, the engagement of young people can be given the rightful space to inform.
5.3.4 In relation to my project proposed in Field Based Project B, Working with young African males utilising the public space in Footscray, it would be an opportunity, under the policy Future Directions to be resources by government to work explore Forum Theatre as a process of engaging and exploring issues of Social Exclusion. How inspiring and empowering would it be for these young Africans and if the project was resourced and informative for policy makers if they came to the performances and engaged with the concept as a way of collating the outcomes instead of just counting the presentation from some remote office as one event?
5.1 The Questions
1. What is my role as a professional artist working in the community, in supporting the community using CCD/Artistic process to inform and influence policy?
2. Are policy makers really engaging with community outcomes or the young people and their communities are being done a disservice by the government by the lack of proper engagement or lack of accurate measurement of participation in state funded programs?
2. Could Policy Makers defer the authority to young people to determine how their participation is measured in state funded programs?
3. Arts and culture are at the centre of Youth policy, they are the most significantly resourced action. How can Artists and participants be at the core of determining how the outcomes inform the Action agenda for Young Victorians?
5.2 Rationale
There seems to be a space for arguing the rationale for exploring how the process of engaging young people through the Arts in funded programs can better be evaluated and inform policy makers and policy. The clear assumption of course is that the process can be principled by applying an expertise, CCD in this case. This is definitely a step forward in introducing more accountability of Youth policy as examined in this review. It also is an opportunity to reflect on the processes at play through the program that have meaning in changing peoples lives, however, the other rationale that could be put in place is the appreciation without exposing the processes at play. Art is alive, and let people see it for themselves without someone picking it out for all to see. But then, this is reporting in essence, you isolate and highlight, will then showcasing and engaging with the Art/facts be better in policy makers being informed and influenced by a process that cannot be named? Or disciplined?
The current report of outcomes within the programs reviewed also point to an interesting linkage, According to the principles cited by Adams and Goldbard as guiding the principles of ccd workers, “ Active participation in cultural life is an essential goal of ccd” 1Applying to the current reporting on the outcomes of programs reviewed translating the Future Directions policy into community engagement, the figures collected for reporting, such as number of young people participating in FReeZA events could rationally be argued as representing the figure of “young active participants” in cultural life. Active and participation as words present their own problematic as John Hawke points out,” A lot of government material runs fast and loose with this word”1too right.
Finally
6 Conclusion
4.1 In reviewing the public Youth Policy, Future Directions, it is evident that a careful introduction of CCD principles in the form Arts based evaluation methods for the policy driven programs would result in a completion of a policy cycle where the policy in theory is informed by the policy in Action.
Bibliography
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy, accessed 20/10/09,
http://www.wiktionary.org/, accessed 18/10/09
http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/accessed, 10/10/09
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a1, accessed 10/10/09
www.equalopportunitycommission.vic.gov.au/human20%, accessed, 1/10/09
www.yacvic.org.au/aboutus/items/ accessed 11/09/09
www.dpcd.vic.gov.au, accessed 20/10/09
Flinders University, (2009) Practical Social Capital: A policy Briefing, Flinders University Publishing, South Australia
Pierre-Marc D and Jacob S, (2009) Toward Accurate Measurement of Participation: Rethinking the Conceptualization and Operationalization of Participatory Evaluation, American Journal of Evaluation, Sage publications
Nicholson, Tony, (2007), A New Australian Model of Social Inclusion and employment Services, Brotherhood of St Laurence
hawkes, John, (2003) , article for Artwork, Community Cultural Development according to Adams and Goldbard, Issue #56
Department of Victorian Communities, Future Directions: An Action Agenda for Young Victorians, Published by the state government, Victoria, Melbourne
State of Victoria, (2002) RESPECT: The Government ‘s Vision for Young People, Published by the state government, Victoria, Melbourne
State of Victoria, (2009) A Fairer Victoria-Standing together through tough times ,Published by the state government, Victoria, Melbourne
Hawkes, John, (2001), The fourth Pillar of sustainability, Cultural Development Inc
Althaus, Catherine; Bridgman, Peter and Davis, Glyn, (2007), The Australian Policy Handbook (4thed). Sydeny;Allen &Unwin
Madanipour, Ali et. al. (1998), Social Exclusion in European Cities: Processes, Experiences and Responses, (eds) London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers Ltd
Aber Lawrence, (2009), Experiments in 21st century antipoverty policy, Public Policy Research, University of New York
PACA, (2009), Overview of the Victorian State Budget Papers 2009, Initiatives for PACA groups, Department of Planning and Community Development
Add a Comment
About
Badge
© 2009 Created by SkinnyTwin Theatre on Ning. Create Your Own Social Network
You need to be a member of SkinnyTwin Theatre to add comments!
Join this social network