2 weeks ago
9
Young people should be paid to voice their views on the shape of their communities, says a youth advocacy group.
Youth Affairs Council Victoria officer Finn Stirling, 26, says it’s a problem that home owners over 45 are overrepresented in consultation processes.Credit: Simon Schluter
In a submission to a state parliamentary community consultation inquiry, the Youth Affairs Council Victoria has called for young people to be given a seat at the table during community consultation and to be offered payment for their time.
Finn Stirling, 26, a youth participation officer at the Youth Affairs Council, said: “We’re in a cost-of-living crisis and … a young person likely has to leave uni early or reject a shift of work. Remunerating them recognises the effort it takes to participate.”
Remuneration is a broadly accepted method to ensure people who face greater participation barriers are getting involved, and the idea is echoed in several other submissions to the inquiry.
Stirling knows first-hand how excluded young people feel from discussions that shape their communities. He said it was a problem that older home owners were overrepresented in consultation processes because young people were full of ideas, and they had the right to be involved.
Younger Victorians often didn’t know where to find opportunities to contribute or struggled to make meeting times, Stirling said, and when they did engage, the communication was usually unclear, drab or full of jargon.
The youth council also wants consultation processes to last at least 10 weeks, be promoted in youth environments and social media, avoid tokenism and clearly state how input will be used.
The inquiry, which now has hearings under way, is examining the effectiveness of consultation practices by state and local governments and statutory authorities, including the use of the Engage Victoria website for state projects.
Many submissions to the inquiry call for consultation processes to involve a greater spread of voices, such as people who are young, culturally and linguistically diverse, First Nations or have a disability.
Loading
Others believe the views of longstanding residents should be given greater weight and argue the Victorian government’s planning reforms to boost housing supply, including its activity centre program, have been rushed through with inadequate consultation and transparency.
YIMBY (Yes In My Backyard) Melbourne, an organisation that supports increasing housing density in inner and middle suburbs and scrapping most heritage overlays, analysed for its submission the demographics of 15 different consultation processes for new developments across six councils.
The group says that home owners and residents aged over 45 are overrepresented compared with the demographics of the areas, and just 0.2 per cent of the community are getting involved.
YIMBY Melbourne lead Jonathan O’Brien said: “Opt-in consultation processes privilege people with large amounts of time on their hands, such as wealthier, older home owners. We should limit the amount of credence we give to this type of consultation.”
O’Brien said the standard model of opt-in consultation slowed positive progress because it attracted people who were against change.
“These consultations empower a certain subset of people ... Why are we privileging this vocal minority?”
To ensure consultation was representative of a community, he called for governments to use broad-based polling or strategies to engage different demographics and gather high-quality information before delivering housing or infrastructure projects.
“You need to be pulling from a pool of the community, rather than just the people who show up to the Engage Victoria portal or to a council meeting on a Thursday,” he said.
RMIT Centre for Urban Research lecturer Liam Davies backed the idea of remuneration as it was important to decrease barriers for engagement, but he warned it didn’t solve the problem of how to reach people of diverse ages, abilities and backgrounds.
Loading
Davies cautioned against throwing out opt-in processes and disregarding the views of over-50s home owners based on an assumption that they wanted opposite things to young renters.
He said older home owners tended to be more engaged in consultation processes because they had longer, stronger connections to an area, as well as possibly having more time and desire to be involved.
“Just because someone is older doesn’t mean that they don’t care about younger people,” Davies said. “Middle-aged people have children, so the responses they give might be reflective of what they want for their children.”
The Municipal Association of Victoria’s inquiry submission hits out at a “deeply concerning” trend of the state government asking people participating in project design to sign non-disclosure agreements. The Age previously revealed that residents, community groups and councils were being asked to sign secrecy deals.
The peak body for local councils also criticises the Engage Victoria website’s limited awareness, technical language and lack of post-consultation reports.
The Surrey Hills and Mont Albert Progress Association wrote in its submission that public involvement in planning decisions were progressively being limited, and when there was consultation, the lack of feedback afterwards left participants unsure whether their views had been considered.
“We have also observed the Engage Victoria platform is used as a convenient cover for inadequate consultation practices ... The marketing and communications approach taken tends to mask detailed explanation and proper engagement,” the association’s document states.
The Bayside Heritage Group submits that there is distrust of the consultation for the state’s activity centre program, promotion of the process has been poor and access for young families is difficult due to the times available.
The Victorian government was contacted for comment.
Most Viewed in National
Loading
