We still need youth centres

Bishop Nikol Cauchi's contribution, "Do we still need youth centres?" (January 31) shows in a very clear and succinct manner the pervading popular perception of the history of youth centres which fall under the aegis of the Church in Malta. It reads like a critically reflective exercise that results in a number of statements and questions that deserve careful consideration. It is to Mgr Cauchi's credit that he publicly reveals his preoccupation with the progressive demise of youth centres and with the need to revive them.

However, it would neither be out of place nor inappropriate to respond to some of the observations made.

Mgr Cauchi asks: "But why have they deserted these centres and where are they...?" As if as an afterthought, this question was asked when the answers were apparently unwittingly provided by the author himself in the preceding paragraphs: youth centres have been converted into parish centres and deposits for festa paraphernalia.

Those who matter most, that is, young people, have been, and still are, excluded outrightly and/or in a paternalistic and authoritarian manner, from the administrative set-up.

The list of youth centres that have closed down, and are still closing down, for these reasons and for reasons of some form of conflict is evidence of the uncompromising and unprofessional attitude of those in authority.

Such a situation would have been, to some extent, understood up to about 10 years ago when professionally trained youth and community workers were not available on the local "labour" market. It is beyond comprehension that neither the Church nor the state for that matter have had the good sense of making adequate use of trained personnel whose training must have cost the country a substantial financial outlay.

Another very important question asked by Mgr Cauchi and which also deserves as much attention is: "But what about the others?"

It is pertinent to draw the readers' attention to the fact that both past and recent research studies carried out at the Programme of Youth Studies at the University of Malta reveal that, at best, youth centres cater for an average of nine per cent of those aged between 13 and 24!

In real terms, the "others", in Malta, are often categorised as those with particular problems such as the misuse of substances or delinquent behaviour.

In fact, no fewer than four/five agencies have been established with this specific remit. This is not to say that working with young people with difficulties or with particular needs is not deserving of society's support.

It is more to say that the majority of young people aged between 15 and 25 are being taken for granted in that they do not make enough "noise" to be heard by a "caring" society!

Young people who shun attendance at youth centres or who "appear" free from visible and tangible difficulties do not wish to be offered "any kind of help" or to have persons looking "after their welfare".

Nor should NGOs be seen as incapable of functioning without an annual grant from the government. "Our" (whose?) young people need an integrationist approach that does not exhibit a concern which reduces them to a lot of incompetent social actors.

If I may spell out what experience, research studies and ongoing youth policy development have revealed, young people:

(a) deserve a service that is availed of rather than one that is given;

(b) need early training in participation skills in schools. Their competence and influence in decision-making surfaces when opportunities are provided in an adequate and fair manner by those trained to do so;

(c) are not impressed by either mere provision or paternalism;

(d) resist rules and restrictions. They want to provide for themselves but they welcome advice and example;

(e) feel abandoned both by permissive neglect and authoritian imposition;

(f) are capable of distinguishing between "responsible and responsive adults" and "uninformed and unprofessional leaders" and;

(g) have aspirations and expectations that can be safely trusted only in the hands of professionals in conjunction with voluntary helpers.

From this framework of concepts, the following practices and structures emerge.

A youth service is one that follows a policy of coordination and consultation with other services such as education, employment training, health promotion, and cultural activities.

Centres for youth activities of all kinds should become youth and community centres. For young people, coming to terms with the adult world and with the covert relationship that exists between generations is particularly essential in terms of active citizenship.

The informal education that occurs in youth and community centres is part and parcel of lifelong education and, as such, requires official recognition by the state as a matter of policy.

If these practices and structures are adopted, society (particularly the Church and the state in this scenario) can truly claim that it has the interest of young people at heart.