YOUTH SEEN BUT NOT HEARD?

Youth Parliament 2000 met in Wellington last week but is anyone listening
to what these young people had to say? asks ODT Youth Parliament Reporter
Melanie Bunce.

Secondary school students from all around New Zealand came together for the
third Youth Parliament since 1994, spending three days in select committees
and debating the partial decriminalisation of cannabis.

Even when the formal debate was not in session, the students were involved
in lobbying and political discussion during morning tea, lunch and
afternoon tea. (The three-day experience involved not only acting but
eating like politicians as well.)

The standard of debate was excellent, the speeches emotive, intelligent and
persuasive. The young adults were well-informed and passionate about their
views. A heated debate led to a vote of 67-49 against a Bill proposing the
partial decriminalisation of cannabis, much to the surprise of many adults
and even some MPs.

After the Bill was rejected, one audience member commented: "It shows that
they're really thinking about it. They're talking about the potential
consequences and not just saying `hey, pot's all right, we should be
allowed to do what we want', which I think is showing more maturity than
some of the real MPs."

In the general debate, youth MPs discussed issues including youth suicide,
student loan schemes, the environment and the gap between Maori and Pakeha
in education.

But is anyone listening to the concerns of these young people?

Michael Green, a rather cynical youth MP from Waikato, commented "Helen
Clark won't even listen to small business, why should she listen to us?"

In the absence of Ms Clark, former prime minister Jenny Shipley was asked
whether she thought anyone was listening to what Youth Parliament had to
say. She said it had to be kept in context. "On a normal day, not a lot of
people listen to me."

Youth Affairs Minister Laila Harre promised before Youth Parliament began
that the Government would be listening to the opinions of the young people
involved. A written record, known as the Hansard report, is taken of all
the views expressed in the House by the Young MPs.

But does anybody actually read the reports? Dunedin North MP Pete Hodgson
said he had not read them before but he had seen some of the media coverage
of previous Youth Parliaments.

Is Mr Hodgson's experience typical? If so, why are these reports not being
read? Why, when four separate Youth MPs in one hour of general debate are
voicing real concerns about youth suicide and the need for education, do
the real MPs not take notice?

The role of an MP is to take the concerns of their electorate to Parliament.

Here are real members of electorates, voicing their real concerns in
Parliament. Surely something more could be done with these concerns than to
put them in a report that most MPs do not even read?

But being heard by key decision-makers and the general public was just one
of four aims of Youth Parliaments. While this aim may not have been met,
many others have.

Those young people involved were given a first-hand experience of the
political system in New Zealand. they had the opportunity to speak in the
House, mix with politicians, develop their political beliefs and pick up
new skills in trying to negotiate and find a compromise in the select
committees. Each of them will take back to their area a better
understanding of New Zealand politics and a higher awareness of the issues
facing young people today.

As Green MP Nandor Tanczos put it: "Talking about anything always makes a
difference."

If nothing else, the positive media coverage of the Youth Parliament may
have dented the somewhat negative stereotype of youth. Maybe it will help
people out there see that there are some youths, as Palmerston North Youth
MP Gareth Richards put it "making a difference - reaching for the stars and
getting close".