The UK Governments Policy Changes Towards Young People - Essay Example

UK Governments Policy Changes towards Young People, Sport and Physical Activity Introduction It is an established and generally accepted fact that education, sport and participation in physical activities has the potential to offer young people a range of physical, psychological and social benefits (Sandford et al, 2006). Sports has the ability to foster a wide range of socio-economic benefits to any community, where it is being properly practiced, and can also provide enhanced life skills to individuals within such a community. These benefits include: higher educational standards, more prosperous economies and stronger and safer communities, in which everyone becomes a participant (Sport England, 2004). These realisations appear to be reflected in the current UK Government policies towards young people sport and physical activity, especially in the aftermath of the successful bidding for the 2012 Olympic Games. The games appeared to have provided the necessary impetus for the required change in Government policies (The Economic Development, Culture, Sport and Tourism Committee, 2006). These changes in government approach to the youth is arguably evident from the recent proliferation of numerous policies affecting the young population and especially promoting sport and physical activity (Jones and Robert, 2000). This essay attempt to confirm the generally held opinion that there has been a pronounced shift in the UK Government's policies concerning the young population, especially with regards to sport and physical activity, as a tool for improving skills and life chances, and reducing anti-social behaviours among youth. In this regard, this essay will look at the several Government programmes implemented since the successful bidding for the 2012 Olympic Games for their impact on improving physical activity among and also the rationale behind these programmes. To start with, it is interesting to note that Government seem to have suddenly realised the cost of lack of activity in the population. Sport England paper (2004) reports that "Government has recognised the negative economic and social consequences of physical inactivity" and "the cost of physical inactivity in England was put, conservatively, at 2 billion per annum, representing at least 54,000 lives lost prematurely" (2004 p4). Under such situation, one can easily understand the Government's urge to improve the level of physical activity and sport, especially among the youths, as they constitute the most vibrant part of any population. Successfully winning the bid to host the 2012 Olympic Games, apparently, provided a better platform to role out the necessary programmes required to achieve this goal (Sandford et al, 2006; Jones and Robert, 2000). In the London Plan for Sport and Physical Activity, the aims of planning for the 2012 Olympic games were highlighted as: increasing overall physical activity participation rates by an average of 1% per year; increasing participation by all under-represented groups; and providing the structures needed for individuals to realise their sporting potential (Sport England, 2004). Accordingly, the determination to maximise opportunities for children and young people to make physical activity part of their everyday life became a major driving force behind recent Government policies and programmes. Commenting on the rationale behind current UK youth policies, Sandford et al (2006), argue that most contemporary UK policy initiatives have sought to locate youth 'disaffection' within the wider context of social exclusion, as evidenced by the formation of the Social Exclusion Unit (SEU) in 1997 and thus, have attempted to use sport and physical activity to break down barriers, enable hard-to-reach youths become more socially inclusive, and also as a tool for re-engaging disaffected youths (Sandford et al, 2006). The first sign of policy changes towards the young, recently, could be seen in the recent trend towards what is referred to as "Joined Up" policies (Bynner, 2001). Realising the sometimes negative impact of the confusing, and at times, contrasting policy initiatives from the different departments that relate to the youths, the Government is taking a collaborative approach to policy making. As a result, a holistic approach to youth policies now appears to be the trend in Government (Bynner, 2001; Goddard, 2003). Policies towards young people are, at last, beginning to take on board the increasing complexity and difficulty involved with dealing with youths. The inadequacy of the social support young people receive in many areas, especially those who have fallen through the education/employment net, has led to a reappraisal of the institutions relating to them. 'Care leavers' and homeless young people have been a central concern, and a new advisory and support service for 13-19 year olds, ConneXions, has been launched (SEU, 1999b). Secondary education policy, particularly, is moving in American directions, whereby staying on at school to 18 would be the norm rather than the exception, and 'graduation from high school' would be the goal for everybody (SEU, 1999b; SEU, 2000). These initiatives, coupled with other programmes operated by the Children and Young People's Unit, are all predicated on the idea of 'Joined up' policies that cut across Governmental departments and aimed at presenting a common front to youth policy making (Sandford et al, 2006). Interestingly, however, sport and improved physical activity as been seen as a major tool that can used to improve on the social support that young people enjoy. This fact is reflected in the DCMS report that Getting school children into sport-and keeping them involved-is especially vital as regular participation can reduce obesity, improve fitness levels and, by improving concentration and self-esteem, can help attendance, behaviour and attainment. (DfES/ Department for Culture, Media and Sport [DCMS], 2004, preface) Sport and physical activity have been identified in several research literatures as capable of correcting a number of social problems in contemporary society, such as poor health, depression, violence, crime and general well-being (Hellison et al., 2000, Robertson, 2000). In the introduction to the UK Government's Policy Action Team 10 report, which examined the role that the arts and sport can play in tackling social exclusion, it was stated that: Art and sport can not only make a valuable contribution to delivering key outcomes of lower long-term unemployment, less crime, better health and better qualifications, but can also help to develop the individual pride, community spirit and capacity for responsibility that enable communities to run regeneration programmes themselves (DCMS, 1999 p. 2) In this regard, in December of 2002, the Government published 'Game Plan' as a platform for achieving its sport and physical activity objectives. The national agenda, as set forth in the Game Plan include: to increase and widen the base of participation in sport, to target success in international sport, such as the Olympic Games, and promote reforms necessary for the strategy to succeed. Achieving a 70% active participation in physical activity (i.e. 5x30minutes of activity per week) was set as the target of the Game Plan (Sport England, 2004). To achieve these targets, 'Game Plan' initiated the creation of a cross-Governmental group - the Activity Co-ordination Team (ACT), which was saddled with the responsibility of working with several partners from different categories in developing a strategy to increase participation in physical activity and sport as set in the Game Plan document. This strategy includes: a focus on walking and cycling, a desire that departments and other agencies co-ordinate the delivery of physical activity and sport at national, regional and local levels; the direction of resources to ensure the greatest gain; and the need to spread learning from existing examples of good practice and innovation (Sport England, 2004). Also, the recent Government investment of 459 million in a strategy to promote physical education, school sport and club links (PESSCL) conclusively proves the shift in Government policies as it affect youth and physical activity. This fact is further compounded when we put into cognisance the recent growth in specialist sports college, whose major goal, according to the DCMS is "'supporting behaviour improvement strategies and engaging young people in lifelong learning", and the enabling environment created for corporate bodies to invest in physical activity to help change young people's lives for the better (DfES/DCMS, 2004, Campbell, 2004). Certainly, initiatives such as the Youth Sport Trust/BSkyB 'Living for Sport' project, HSBC/Outward Bound, Tall Ships and Kielder Challenge projects and the New Opportunities for PE and Sport programme which all begin 2002/03 lends credence to the Government shift in policies regarding physical activity. This is especially so, since corporate policies and investments always follow the line of policy established by Governments (Campbell, 2004). Bynner (2001) accurately captures the present mode of government when he states that recent Government policies "align much more closely with continental approaches to comprehensive youth policy than was the case in the past. For the first time there is to be ministerial responsibility for young people via a cabinet committee and a new Youth Unit is to be established, charged with collating information and undertaking research" (Bynner, 2001 p19). Although, it is important to state that, the current policy trend towards physical activity and sport in the younger population is not solely aimed at correcting and/or reducing anti-social behaviours. The cost of physical inactivity, as has been reported in several documents and studies, are to numerous for any responsible Government to ignore. Sport England (2004) reports that the estimated costs of physical inactivity in UK is put at are 8.2 billion every year. This figure, however, does not consider the fact that inactivity is one of the major contributors to obesity, the cost of which has been put at 2.5 billion annually. Also, the Government's development of a White Paper on Public Health brings to the fore, the fact that improving physical activity in the population is not the concern of the Government, the National Health Service and the public services alone; individuals, organisations and communities too have roles to play (Sport England, 2004). For example, the number of children that walk to school has reportedly dropped from 60% early in the 1990s to 51%, while over the same period, the number of children being driven to school has increased from 29% to 41% (DOH, 2004). Thus, the development of public policy that creates an enabling environment for improved physical activity has a great potential of saving lives, reducing the strain on health resources and helping the industry become more productive. In addition, the shift in Government policy towards increased participation in physical activity may be justifiable on economic grounds. As physical activity has the potential to create a more socially responsible and healthy young population; it also positively impacts the economy of the country (Sport England, 2004). Conclusion So far, this essay has provided an overview of the shift in Government policies that affect young people, especially with respect to sport and physical activity. Review of academic literatures and several Government papers has established the profound belief in the ability of sport and physical activity to function as a vehicle for personal, social and moral developments. In addition, the privilege of hosting the 2012 Olympic Games provided the Government with a perfect avenue to exercise this belief. Therefore, this essay has not only confirmed the opinion that there is a shift in Government youth and sport policies; it has also sought to explain the rationale behind these policy initiatives. References Bynner, John (2001). British Youth Transitions in Comparative Perspective. Journal of Youth Studies, Vol. 4, No. 1, 5-23. Taylor & Francis Ltd. Campbell, S. (2004) Keynote presentation: Specialist Sports Colleges conference, Shropshire, 4-5 March. Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) (1999) Policy Action Team 10: report to the Social Exclusion Unit-Arts and Sport. London: HMSO. Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) (1999) Statistical Release, 11/99. London: The Stationery Office. Department for Education and Skills (DfES)/Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) (2004) High quality PE and sport for young people. Nottingham DfES Publications. Department for Education and Skills (DfES)/Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) (2004) High quality PE and sport for young people. Nottingham: DfES Publications. Goddard, Jim (2003). Youth Justice Policy in the United Kingdom. Criminal Justice Studies, Vol. 16(4), pp. 329-338. Taylor & Francis Ltd. Hellison, D., Cutforth, N., Kallusky, J., Martinek, T., Parker, M. & Stiel, J. (2000) Youth Development and Physical Activity: Linking Universities and Communities. Champaign, IL, Human Kinetics). Jones, Gill and Robert Bell (2000). Balancing Acts Youth, Parenting and Public Policy. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, London: York Publishing Services Ltd. Lindsay, Colin, and Mikkel Mailand (2004). Different Routes, Common Directions Activation policies for young people in Denmark and the UK. International Journal of Social Welfare, 13: 195-207. Blackwell Publishing. Robertson, B. J. (2000) Leisure Education As A Rehabilitative Tool For Youth In Incarceration Settings. Journal of Leisurability, 27(2), 27-34. Sandford Rachel A. Kathleen M. Armoura and Paul C. Warmington (2006). Re-Engaging Disaffected Youth Through Physical Activity Programmes. British Educational Research Journal Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 251-271. Taylor & Francis Ltd. Social Exclusion Unit (1999b) Bridging the Gap: New Opportunities for 16-18 Year-Olds Not in Education Employment or Training. London: The Stationery office. Social Exclusion Unit (2000) Report of Policy Action Team 12: Young People. London: The Stationery office. Sport England (2004). The London Plan For Sport And Physical Activity: Working For An Active And Successful Sporting Capital. The Economic Development, Culture, Sport and Tourism Committee (2006). London Olympic and Paralympic Games A sporting legacy for people with disabilities. London: Greater London Authority. Read More