Sandbox politics
This is a follow-up to yesterday’s post.
I wrote about five versions of the Participation doesn’t just mean parties post before I published it. Harry Phibbs comment piece covers a multitude of issues and it was difficult focusing my post on one element. The responses to it have drawn in other issues.
CB asks whether UKYP and local youth councils have led to a separation of young people away from the adult political arena, and therefore are counter-productive. It’s a genuine concern and one that I think should be seriously considered; but I don’t think young people have stopped being involved in ‘adult’ politics as a result. MYPs and local youth mayors etc all regularly meet with politicians and other stakeholders, as do many other young people. I don’t know of any research that suggests this is the case, nor whether there ever was a golden period where this happened. However, we should not be complacent.
My reason for supporting UKYP/BYC etc was that it provides a space for young people to develop the skills and experience needed for political engagement. As I was writing it, I used the term “sandbox politics”, but decided not to use it as it could belittle their work. However on reflection I think it is quite a good term. (Deprived from a sandbox computer that you can test new things on before deploying them on to a main/live system).
The danger of not having “sandboxes” is that young people who are less confident about engaging in public debate or being proactive in campaigning for something never get the opportunity to develop those skills. Or they attempt them and are put off by the rough-and-tumble of political engagement. Harry Phibbs says that young people should write a blog if they want to participate, but even that requires a fairly thick skin, not to mention confidence with the written word.
That’s not to say UKYP/BYC are just sandbox operations – and I’ve been impressed by campaigns like UKYP’s fares fair campaign for a consistent deal for young people on transport (an issue that I can’t imagine being raised by any of the existing political parties). BYC has long campaigned for Votes at 16, and that feels like it is moving closer to being a reality.
Mike’s point about UKYP/BYC being “representative” organisations I agree with more. But in defence of UKYP I don’t think its messaging recently is around that. Nor do I think that politicians, who are elected in broadly the same way, can criticise UKYP for not being representative of young people when MPs hardly reflect the UK’s population. It’s also interesting to ask how much money, outside of the political parties, is spent on improving the diversity of elective representatives in both Parliament and local councils. I’d hazard a guess at very little.
Image courtesy of Dr Craig. Used under licence.
Tags:byc, harry phibbs, house of commons, parliament, ukyp
31. March 2009 at 1:22 am :
Hi Olly, thanks for this follow-up.
I quite like your metaphor of the sandbox, and agree with the point you’re making about it. These ‘training spaces’ are indeed necessary and helpful. My only concern is the danger of them being considered by some as no more than that -a training space for young people for when they become involved in politics ‘for real’-, and therefore not a true instrument of youth participation as an end in itself.
I think youth participation in politics should always be a place for both- developing skills and learning as well as to engage in the official ‘mainstream’ political debate. The examples you give about the work UKYP and BYC are doing are evidence that both of these things are happening, which is certainly good news. I just think it’s important to keep a look-out for societal trends and/or individuals who might not value or not take seriously the latter of these dimensions.
I’m fairly new to the UK and have been studying recently general historic processes of segregation of children and teenagers from adult society, which was kind of my starting point for the concern I mentioned in my previous comment. I didn’t mean to suggest that since these organisations existed youth participation had effectively decreased, it was only a thought about the role they are possibly playing -and might play in the future- in larger society.