|
Memorandum from the
1. Introduction
1.1. This submission is made in response to the call
for evidence from the Communities and Local Government Committee on 1.2. This submission is based on a two year project
- Project Safe Space - undertaken by young people from across 1.3. Project Safe Space is a national initiative implemented and delivered by young people from the UK Youth Parliament (UKYP) (a registered charity) in partnership with other regional and local youth organisations. The programme was funded by the Department for Children, Schools and Families, the Home Office (Office for Security and Counter Terrorism) and the Association of Chief Police Officers National Community Tension Team (now incorporated into the ACPO Prevent Delivery Unit). 1.4. The regional conferences were co-ordinated by a National Steering Group of fourteen young people representing Regional Steering Groups of young people in each of the nine regions. 1.5. The steering groups were asked to deliver a conference - a safe space - for any young person from any community to discuss their concerns and views about terrorism, violent extremism, youth leadership and working with the police. Adults supported the delivery of the conferences but all formats, presentations, podcasts, drama and facilitation of workshops was designed, agreed and delivered by young people. 1.6. A national report on the findings from the project was published by young people in July 2009 and it is on those findings that this submission is based. Where relevant, references are included in this submission to the national report. A copy of the national report is included with this submission, and further hard copies are available if required. 1.7. This submission is structured around the eight questions raised by the Committee but draws on the findings of the national report to represent the composite views of young people. This submission has been drafted by staff and advisors to the UK Youth Parliament and agreed by young people from the Project Safe Space National Steering Group.
2. Summary
· The Government programme for preventing violent extremism has failed to engage effectively with young people who are fearful of discussing extremism and distrustful of the Government approach. · Where young people are concerned about extremism within their own communities they want safe spaces to raise issues or concerns at local level with people they trust such as teachers and youth workers. · Young people have a broader understanding of extremism within a local context and do not understand what Government mean by terrorism and violent extremism. They believe that the current Government definitions unfairly target the Muslim community and Islam. They believe that this bias is also reflected in media coverage of the issue. · Young people have not been consulted directly by Government because they have no leadership role in local communities unless adults have created one for them. Consequently the voices of young people are not being heard, and where they are being heard they are not being listened to. · Young people see a direct link between community cohesion and extremism, the latter being more prevalent in less cohesive communities. Therefore Government initiatives should focus on developing positive relationships within and between diverse communities to provide local environments that can challenge extremism. · Current Government initiatives are 'top down' and consequently have little relevance to young people. The Prevent programme should be developed involving young people in youth led initiatives at regional level, whereby young people become the best advocates of the Prevent programme to their peers. · Despite this Government are best placed to develop and deliver a multi agency national Prevent Strategy and young people are ready, willing and able to support Government in that task.
3. Our Response
3.1. Is the Prevent programme the right way of addressing the problem of violent extremism, or are their better ways of doing it?
3.1.1. Project Safe Space has identified a fundamental need for a coherent Prevent strategy co-ordinated by Government but including all key agencies and organisations involved in preventing terrorism and violent extremism. Whilst there is an overarching Contest Strategy to counter terrorist activity, the UKYP experience of developing this project is that there appears to be little co-ordination between Government departments, regional government, local government, the police and other agencies. Each department or agency appears to have developed their own strategic approach with regards to the Prevent agenda with their own desired outcomes and goals. This is complicated still further on a regional and local level, where staff empowered to work on Prevent projects are unaware of opportunities to link up activity. Young people for example have clearly identified a link between community cohesion and extremism. Yet it appears that the DCLG have the Government lead for community cohesion and the Home Office have the lead for preventing terrorism yet the two approaches appear mutually exclusive. 3.1.2. Whilst there is a fundamental need for a
Prevent programme the Government approach is very much 'top down'. In terms of
young people, this manifests itself in Government identifying what the
'prevent' issues are for young people and then delivering strategies in
response. Project Safe Space has identified that the Government Prevent
programme has little impact on young people as it has no context at a local
level or the day to day experiences of young people. In addition, there are
variations in these experiences between regions with young people in 3.1.3. In terms of the Prevent environment and young people, there was a genuine fear[1] that any discussion about terrorism or extremism within communities would be seen as suspicious by the police and authorities (hence the Project name Safe Space).This fear included those working with young people such as youth workers and teachers. The fear was linked to a distrust[2] of Government and its approach. Therefore those very people from whom the Government and police need support are fearful of giving it. Any Prevent programme must have at its core strategies to create an environment of trust and confidence between young people, the police and Government. This point cannot be overstated, and will require a clear, co-ordinated, joined up and long-term community partnership strategy to bring about the appropriate impact. 3.1.4. Any Government Prevent programme must include young people directly in its development and implementation. Young people have shown through Safe Space that they are innovative and responsive when given the space and support to do so. By involving young people in a genuine reciprocal partnership then they can become the best advocates of a Government prevent strategy amongst their peers.
3.2. How robust is the Government's analysis of the factors which lead people to become involved in violent extremism? Is the 'Prevent' programme appropriately targeted to address the most important of those factors?
3.2.1. The perception of young people from across all diverse groups is that the Government Prevent strategy is focused on the Muslim community and Islam. The focus was negative supported by an anti Islamic press and yet young people were keen to 'challenge the prejudices and stereotypes, indicating that everyone is capable of terrorism'.[3] 3.2.2. This perception should be seen within the context of young people's wider discussion about extremism within their own communities. Within that context examples of extremism for their part, included groups advocating animal rights, fathers for justice, the British National Party, the IRA. Young people also made the point that extremism could be a force for good[4]. Consequently within the broader definition of extremism given by young people a perceived Government approach focused on the Muslim community was seen as inappropriate. 3.2.3. Viewed within an international context and with regards to the origin of the current threat from terrorism and extremism it is understandable that the Government Prevent agenda focus on extremism that exploits the Muslim community and Islam as an excuse for criminality. However that perspective is difficult for a large number of young people to visualise locally within their communities, as expressed by young people in one region 'the event identified a real concern both prior to and after the Conference that terrorism and violent extremism had nothing to do with young people in the North East of England'[5].
3.3. How appropriate, and how effective, is the Government's strategy for engaging with communities? Has the Government been speaking to the right people? Has its programme reached those at whom it is - or should be - aimed?
3.3.1. If you were to view young people as a community then the Government's strategy has been particularly ineffective in reaching the vast majority of young people. The focus appears to have been on those working with young people such as teachers, University staff and local authority youth services as opposed to young people themselves. 3.3.2. There is also a great deal of youth engagement undertaken within the voluntary or third sector either through independent youth clubs and projects or uniformed organisations yet the voluntary sector has not been widely consulted. Project Safe Space's openness ensured participation from a wide cross section of statutory and non statutory organisations. The DCLG Pathfinder funding programme was seen as inaccessible by many local groups and organisations as they didn't meet the criteria, or they felt that funds were already earmarked by local authorities for well established or known organisations and groups. 3.3.3. One of the NSG requests for Project Safe Space was that it included provision to discuss youth leadership. This was in direct response to a view from young people that they had difficulty getting their voices heard and that agendas and debates were always controlled by adults. As the report notes 'leadership was perceived as an adult role and that often where young people performed leadership roles they felt overpowered or relegated to a dominant and adult viewpoint. More than often adult community leaders did not represent the views of young people and the young people needed to be in a position to challenge the adult view''[6]. Young people were also expected to engage within frameworks devised by adults - i.e.: committee meetings, agendas, chairmen etc and yet Safe Space showed that young people managed to organise and deliver nine successful conferences using online forums, residential workshops, text messaging et al. There is a need for adults to consider engaging with young people within frameworks and structures developed and managed by young people themselves. 3.3.4. The Government Prevent agenda should not seek to determine who has been affected by, or who is vulnerable to extremism. Project Safe Space has been developed with a focus on who has been affected by extremism from a young person's perspective. This has ensured participation from across a wide section of communities, including a young person from the Gipsy and Traveller community on the NSG. For example, whilst it is accepted that the Muslim community within the context of the current terrorist threat may be viewed as especially vulnerable, targeting that community albeit in the best possible interest merely reinforces to others that extremism is only an issue for the Muslim community. Project Safe Space has shown that extremism is an issue for young people across all communities.
3.4. Is the necessary advice and expertise available to local authorities on how to implement and evaluate the programme?
3.4.1. Local authorities have an important role to play in implementing and evaluating the Prevent programme especially as they are able to do so from that local perspective. However there are Prevent activities and programmes being developed across the third sector of which Project Safe Space is one, which are beyond the scope of local authority implementation and monitoring. These initiatives, including Project Safe Space, have developed because of community and local need and therefore consideration should be given to local authorities working in partnership with local community youth groups and youth organisations to develop community based initiatives. The best advice and expertise will come from young people themselves yet currently as outlined in Section 3.3.3 above there are barriers to local authorities in accessing that advice. 3.4.2. However as a result of Project Safe Space
there is an NSG of fourteen young people from across
3.5. Are the objectives of the 'Prevent' agenda being communicated effectively to those at whom it is aimed?
3.5.1. Communication of the prevent strategy to young people is poor, the biggest issue being how the Government defines terrorism and extremism. As the report states 'There was little understanding of the terms 'terrorism' and 'violent extremism' amongst young people as they developed research for their events. Young people identified multiple and conflicting definitions of both terms. What became apparent was that almost all information relating to terrorism was obtained through the media, television and radio and the internet. Young people felt that little information on terrorism and extremism came from the police and Government'[7]. 3.5.2. The other issue was the means of Government communication, with young people's reliance on new media such as the internet, online social networking sites and mobile telephones. At the events themselves young people used a variety of methods to make their point - drama, podcasts and radio to name but a few. One of the report recommendations is that Project Safe Space 'develop a range of new media options that support the Government and police Prevent strategies and it is recommended that they are supported to develop a national youth led new media communications strategy'[8].
3.6. Is the Government seeking and obtaining, appropriate advice on how to achieve the goals of the Prevent programme?
3.6.1. UKYP are of the view that young people are able to give advice in their own right and that Government should develop this to ensure the Prevent goals are met. 3.6.2. Having been successfully delivered, it is now somewhat frustrating to young people on the NSG that they cannot get continued Government support to continue their work with other young people and in particular to deliver three additional Safe Space events in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. The NSG are now being approached by local authorities to deliver youth based Prevent based initiatives and yet Government appear not to be utilising advice and expertise that they have previously funded and is readily available.
3.7. How effectively has the Government evaluated the effectiveness of the programme and value for money which is being obtained from it? Have reactions to the programme been adequately gauged?
3.7.1. In terms of Project Safe Space the project was monitored on an ongoing basis by the DCSF, there was no ongoing monitoring from the Home Office OSCT. 3.7.2. The evaluation of Project Safe Space by the Government from the UKYP perspective has been non specific in terms of working with young people to see how the project could be developed to support the Government Prevent agenda. The reaction to Project Safe Space from beyond Government in terms of ACPO, local police forces and local authorities has been positive and local initiatives are being developed. There has been little response from Government with regards to the 21 recommendations from young people contained within the report. While Ministers backed the initiation of the project, they have yet to meet representatives from the NSG to discuss their findings and recommendations. 3.7.3. In addition, youth workers have asked for training in preventing extremism and ideas for a youth worker training package was being developed by UKYP, the Federation of London Youth Clubs and the National Youth Agency. The Government through the DCSF had offered to consider a bid for funding this package but recently that offer has been withdrawn without explanation. UKYP are exploring external funding options to develop such a package. 3.7.4. It would appear that an initial emphasis and focus on Prevent by the Government has now been overtaken by other priorities and the impetus initially shown has been lost. This is despite the fact that when local communities are engaged on their own terms around these issues, they both welcome the opportunity and are actively calling out for more.
3.8. Is there adequate differentiation between what should be achieved through the Prevent programme and the priorities that concern related, but distinct, policy frameworks such as cohesion and integration?
3.8.1. As outlined in the Summary, young people see a direct link between community cohesion and extremism and feel the Government should create environments where extremism has little opportunity to thrive. 3.8.2. Young people want the Government to support more inter cultural and inter faith events to promote mutual understanding between and within diverse communities. This is not to promote one religion or culture above another but to bring communities together as the report notes 'where young people from different communities had a better understanding of each others cultures and faiths, they found it easier to reject extremist views as their personal experiences and relationships undermined the extremists narrative'[9]. 3.8.3. Whilst it is understood that distinct policy frameworks exist between different Government departments, there must be a coordinated approach through a multi agency Prevent Strategy that encompasses them all with common outcomes as advocated in section 3.1.1 above.
4. Conclusion
4.1. Whilst the tone of this submission could be seen as negative, we feel it is appropriate to reflect accurately the views collected during the project and would reiterate that the willingness of over 1000 young people across England to give their time voluntarily to Project Safe Space is an indication of the need to involve young people in discussions about extremism and those developing policy around it. 4.2. Young people are ready, willing and able to support Government in developing and delivering their Prevent strategy. Young people from the NSG would also welcome the opportunity to support the Committee's Inquiry by providing oral evidence to the Committee if required.
September 2009
[1] Project Safe Space National Report (2009) UKYP p.18, p.25, [2] Ibid p.23, p.43 [3] Project Safe Space National Report (2009) UKYP p.29 [4] Ibid p.29 [5] Ibid p.21 [6] Project Safe Space National Report (2009) UKYP p.6 [7] Project Safe Space National Report (2009) UKYP p.5 [8] Ibid p.37 [9] Project Safe Space National Report (2009) UKYP p.6 |