This is a progressive youth caucus. We don’t have a singular voice for all young people – this one is just for progressive - other youth may have diff objectives and anti choice, etc.
Results of e-discussion summary: A majority of participants could not get information on who would be on government delegations. Large gaps exist in communication between government and Civil Society.
Introduction to UNGASS 2001-2006
In 2006, there was positive reception to youth advocates. There had been groundwork done already by youth advocacy organizations so the reception garnered range of reactions. In general government delegates were more receptive to youth agenda than regular Civil Society.
2006 – what worked?
- Youth caucus had members on government (e.g. Dutch) delegations. Specific governments were receptive to our message and that was our entry point.
- GYCA had a youth summit prior to UNGASS 2006. The main advocacy strategy created a specific youth platform.
Key points
For this high level meeting there are no changes in the document, so what is our role and how will we go about giving input?
It is so important to have youth included in country delegations. In 2006 there were lots of closed-door bilateral meetings. In general it was very poorly organized and non-transparent.
Make sure to invite ourselves (young advocates) to all meetings. Attend all open meetings and show that youth have a presence.
We must involve ourselves with the youth speakers. The Youth Statement is ambitious and unclear. What does ‘youth knowledge’ mean? Reporting indicators are too black and white (e.g. Are you training youth? Yes or No).
1. Country Reports: we need to specify that young people have been working in their own countries on the reporting structure. Civil society creates shadow reports to include information missing or misreported by governments.
2. We should look at the event program and the entire agenda. What to expect, etc. Identify opportunities to advocate.
3. Identify who the speakers are going to be and get in touch with them. Youth Speaker and other speakers sensitive/sympathetic to youth.
4. Keep in mind to observe how many young people are speakers (we wanted in 2006 to have 1/4 or 1/5 as speakers in the plenary).
National Delegation Involvement
Some Youth Caucus participants are also members of their country’s official delegation. We examined whether the participation was meaningful. To show our governments that youth delegations add value is in the exchange of information. It’s very important to keep the lines open with other youth – that’s our value.
“I’ve been in touch with lots of Civil Society organizations to give speaking points, info to send to the government, and fine-tune speaking points of Canada’s address during the Opening Ceremony.”
Participants noted that in 2006 governments were more open to youth participation than regular Civil Society. Civil servants were very open to our suggestions. Civil Society felt that we were stepping on their toes.
“For Brazil they aren’t really open to youth. But in general Brazil has a great dialogue with Civil Society. Government brings Civil Society to validate the process rather than give a meaningful input. We’re only involved at the last minute.”
“I’m an activist so I can be only on the delegation by forcing myself forward. When I enter the room they know I’m speaking the truth and that I’ve been involved in the shadow reports. So long as I’m part of the delegation I will speak out.”

“I contributed to our country’s shadow report (Indonesia) but the indicators were spread out, not integral. There was no holistic view of youth.” The indicators are a problem. It’s too quantitative and there is no voice from countries. We have been working on shadow reports and have developed our own indicators to become more qualitative. Yes and No is not sufficient."
A major theme of this meeting is travel restrictions. It’s up to Civil Society to ask for something this year. We should decide whether the travel restrictions theme should be the banner for this session.