Hadyn Cutler MYP

— Embargoed until 19th Apr (07:30 BST) —

Yesterday, I was provided with the opportunity to meet with the Minister for Sport, Gambling, and Civil Society, Stuart Andrew, as well as civil servants within DCMS who handle areas surrounding youth voice and youth programmes, in order to represent the signatories of the open letter. Also in attendance were members of UK Young Ambassadors (UKYA), who have been an integral part of the campaign to save programmes affected by the closure of the British Youth Council (BYC), such as the UK Youth Parliament (UKYP).

Whilst I will try to share as many details as possible, there will be some things I refrain from sharing publicly. This will be either because I’ve been asked or because I believe that releasing such information may damage the process going forward. When this occurs, I will make this clear to ensure that there is full transparency and accountability, both within my campaign and within the process in general.

Firstly, to discuss updates provided by the minister regarding developments so far, he said that he’s “had a number of meetings with various people over the couple of weeks” including members of the youth parliament and regional delivery partners. We were reassured of both the minister’s and the government’s commitment to UKYP, and that current discussions surround trying to find someone to facilitate until the end of the year, at which point the long-term future of the programme can be looked into in much greater detail. There are more details in this space, but I am unable to share them at this time.

When it comes to other affected programmes such as UK Young Ambassadors, we were told that they are exploring BYC’s role as the national youth council for the UK and that they’ve been in touch with associated organisations.

Discussing communication, we were informed that the lack of contact was due to a lack of information on DCMS’s part, and there has been an effort to get in touch with affected individuals. This has involved the Steering Group, local authority coordinators and a direct letter to MYPs, however, they recognise that this has not reached all MYPs and there is a willingness to go further in this regard. In future discussions with DCMS, I’ll be sure to emphasise this point and do my best to ensure that there is high-quality communication with MYPs and other affected individuals.

On the point of future actions and a timeline, we were told that due to the early stage that the process is in, no concrete timeline could be given. I can say that they are doing their “due diligence” at the moment to ensure that whoever takes over the programme next “is not going to find themselves in the same position six months down the line.”

Other points were raised, mainly by UKYA in regards to the issues faced by their particular programme, and as such I think it’d be best to leave them to choose how they utilise the information provided to them. Summarising the meeting as a whole, I do truly believe DCMS are trying their best to ensure UKYP and other programmes stay around for the foreseeable future, and that this meeting was merely a first step in future discussions surrounding the transition period and whatever comes next. I will continue to try and work with DCMS to ensure that we see more transparency from them surrounding the processes and procedures, and I will publish any updates that I receive (and that I can discuss publicly).

If you have any questions or concerns, please get in touch. Otherwise, thank you for reading.

If you are a journalist looking to cover this story then please find my media enquires form here.