|
NZAAHD/NYWNA Auckland stakeholder meeting
Ferndale House, Mt Albert, 23 July 2010
General summary
About 40 people attended the NZAAHD/NYWNA stakeholder meeting in Auckland on 23 July 2010. Overall, people were positive and excited about the opportunity presented by a new entity. They felt it is a natural partnership, makes sense financially, and creates an opportunity for existing and new work strands to come together, strengthened by sharing resources. It will enhance the professional development of youth workers, and lead to better, research, shared knowledge and advocacy. A united, coordinated voice will also resonate more clearly with colleagues, the sector, funders and government.
There were two competing concerns. The first was about the consultation process: how people get engaged and what happens to those still outside the process, especially if decisions are already being made without their input. The second was the desire for more clarity about the purpose, roles and functions of the new entity, including governance and youth participation, so that stakeholders have something concrete to comment on.
Participants acknowledged the tension between not wanting decisions to be made before consultation while at the same time wanting more clarity about the new entity during consultation - and the inevitable ‘dance' between these two positions. They took away the importance of their own role in spreading the word and bringing people together in the region.
Mandate for change
Three members of the transition committee commented on NYWNA's and NZAAHD's mandate for change and the speed at which it's occurring.
Rod Baxter (NYWNA): NYWNA has been vulnerable for 18 months. Sixty youth workers at a hui in November 2009 gave the board a mandate to do whatever was necessary to survive. In line with the whakatauki: Na to rourou, na taku rourou, ka ora ai te iwi (with my food basket and your food basket, we will feed the people), partnership with NZAAHD is the best way to retain NYWNA's three key areas of work: better connecting the youth worker community, raising the standard of youth work practice, and getting better recognition for youth work and youth workers. The two organisations have to walk a fine line between taking enough time to get the process right but not so long that they lose the opportunity. Unless the new entity is ready to be launched at the Involve conference, NYWNA's work will be lost.
Trissel Mayor (NZAAHD): NZAAHD wants to strengthen connections in the youth sector, build capacity, improve the quality of services for young people, and provide leadership. In the past, it has taken a supportive role and done advocacy work, but a conversation is needed about what leadership is: leading from in front, shared, or devolved to communities. NZAAHD also has ongoing issues about being financially sustainable. Creating a new entity with NYWNA is the best way to secure the future. While it's important to engage people, full consultation would take two years and neither NZAAHD nor NYWNA have the time or resources for that.
Ruru Hona (Te Roopu): Te Roopu was formed in 2006 to hold NYWNA true to the principles of the Treaty. It's not a numbers game but a mana game: the Treaty is inclusive, and everyone has to carry the mantle. Te Roopu and Te Wahanga Maori have met and set up a framework of expectations for the new entity, including a Kaihautu on the board with the chairperson.
Summary of small group discussions
Some of the following ideas came from only one of the five small groups, while others were general themes common to all groups.
1. What do you like about the concept of the new entity?
- The time is right for a new beginning and this is a natural partnership.
- The sector has asked for this for some time.
- It makes good economic and funding sense.
- It creates an opportunity for existing and new strands to come together, strengthened by sharing resources and providing leverage to enhance work already done.
- A united, coordinated voice will resonate more clearly with colleagues, the sector, funders and govt.
- We are keen to rid ourselves of ‘siloed' contracts and a low (confused) profile.
- It will enhance our visibility, mana and capacity.
- There are clear pathways for professional development of youth workers, including tohu, training opportunities and the code of ethics.
- It will draw on best practice from both organisations and lead to better research, shared knowledge and advocacy.
2. What limits does it create?
- Some groups could miss out on consultation and support could diminish, esp if it is mostly by email.
- The new entity might take funding away from other groups, or attract less funding than two separate national organisations.
- The identity of youth workers could be diluted or overwhelmed in a new entity, especially around a commitment to cultural competency - Maori, Pacific, Asian, queer, Faith.
- There's a danger of losing the philosophy of each organisation.
- Moving too quickly because of pressure might lead to declining trust from members.
- Models may not be in line with our objectives or highlight rangatahi or members.
- There is no youth participation in the decision-making.
- People might feel disconnected in a larger entity: could lose volunteers and experienced workers.
- Need to bring in other streams of education and justice (as well as youth work, youth health, youth development).
3. How can these limits be overcome?
- Develop and communicate a consultative process - consultation needs to be clear, transparent and acknowledge what has been agreed and what is up for discussion.
- Have a clear purpose and the right people communicating it.
- Have more consultation in different regions of Auckland, capturing a broad range of ethnicities.
- Provide training and support in regional networks, grassroots connections.
- Don't rush - allow the time it needs to set up the new entity.
- Clearly define membership categories and streams to prevent one professional cluster overwhelming/diluting another.
4. What questions do you still have?
- More clarity around roles, purpose, structure eg governance and leadership.
- How will consultation work, including short and long term goals, so the membership feels included?
- What is the timeline for the new entity: how will the whole sector be informed, participate and be represented?
- What has been the decision-making process including the Treaty model and how have various caucuses fed into decisions?
- Where is the Pacific voice?
- Who's on the transition committee - what's their mana? Terms of reference?
- What's the financial cost of transition? Where will the money come from?
- Will it cost more to belong and what will members get?
- How will the new entity be rolled out regionally?
- What are the staff roles and other operational stuff?
- Will this divert people, time, energy from current work?
Staying involved
Participants agreed that key ways to stay involved in the transition process were through:
- the forum on the NZAAHD website,
- more regional meetings facilitated by branches, and
- inviting people from the transition committee to speak at existing hui and sector events.
- developing a resource such as FAQs that will answer common questions.
Invitation to discuss new youth sector organisation 13 August, Christchurch
|
