Youth cabinet needs focus

The Ottawa Youth Cabinet is currently recruiting new members to fill 11 of its 21 positions when the terms of the last original members expire in June. These 11 new faces will have the daunting task of making their positions relevant.

The advisory committee, comprised of a member from each city council ward, was formed in 2001 to serve as a bridge between the city council and youths aged 15 to 25. The motivators behind the project were the youth themselves.

At present, however, there doesn’t seem to be much desire to make the project a success. Nearly half of the cabinet’s original members are no longer involved. Attendance issues and a lack of interest from city youth have caused problems over the past couple years. The cabinet has cancelled its March meeting.

In examining the struggles of the cabinet, one should take a serious look at its mandate. The concerns of an average 15 year old and a 25 year old vary considerably. By 25, a person has likely completed his or her education and is working regularly. There is little common ground among the group the cabinet is trying to represent.

By trying to serve too broad a community the cabinet fails to take control of a specific, manageable age group which would likely have a more focused interest and be able to put forward stronger lobbying campaigns at the municipal level.Two separate bodies, one catering to teenagers, and one to those over 18 would better serve the youth.

Other than its recent examination of skateboard parks, the cabinet has not been able to address specific topics that capture the interests of the general teenage population.

But what’s worse: despite its limited reach, the cabinet is a drain on city coffers. It’s 2003 budget is approximately $7,000. Included in that expense is a $4,500 one-day mayor’s youth symposium, packed with keynote speakers and two discussion forums. It is hard to think this will draw many teenagers away from friends on a free Saturday afternoon.

The current cabinet has tried diligently to produce professional reports about youth issues. Few youth have noticed. Rather than spending money on report after report, the cabinet should be more concerned with holding public events that would draw youth participation. It could hold more consultations and use its membership to encourage and foster youth activism by taking the knowledge available and directly sharing it with other youth.

If the cabinet insists on maintaining its formality and acting like a bureaucratic body it cannot succeed — as it will blend in with many other interest group imaginable.

If the cabinet is unable to find focused issues and a way to reach out to those it is expected to represent, it might as well not exist. Or, perhaps if the city wants to see true representation, it should make the cabinet directly responsible to youth voters. Then, they’d have to make a difference.

— Adam Bramburger