Youth are frequently constructed as a homogeneous social group in need of "fixing". Moreover, as Sercombe has shown, the ways in which youth are constructed in the media reflect an ambivalence in social attitudes towards young people: "youth can be alternately cast as 'child' to be controlled or as 'adult', to be censured" (1996, 169). Sercombe has further suggested that just as youth are always in the newspaper — portrayed as either 'off the rails' or less frequently as being 'on track' — "governments are always trying to do something, or not do something, about the latest youth problem [...] youth is a problem, a puzzle [...] that never really gets solved" (1996, 10). One aspect of the 'youth problem' relates to the fact that young people seem to have trouble recalling the succession of Australian Prime Ministers and displayed a "widespread ignorance and misconception about Australia's system of government, and the way in which it can serve the needs of its citizens" (Munter, 1996, 28); in fact, young people are perceived as cynical and passive about "pretty much everything to do with politics" (Healy, 1999, 200).

Following the landmark report Education for Active Citizenship (1989, cited in Phillips and Moroz, 1996), various educations departments throughout Australia responded to the "new thrust with clear signs that political and civic education was being given a higher priority" (Phillips and Moroz, 1996, 14). Thus, Owen has suggested:

However, Owen also argued that a 'problem-leads-to-policy-leads-to-program' approach in citizenship eduation is not likely to adress the interests, or indeed meet the needs of young people. I will expand on this in a later section of this paper.

Given the emerging interest in civics and citizenship education, this paper is concerned with teasing out what young people perceived the issues which confront Australian society to be, what they felt could be done to improve society and what they wanted for themselves in the future. The data from the study reported here suggests that, far from being 'too young' to hold politicised views or to express informed opinions, young people are frequently very aware of social reality and often are deeply committed to creating a more socially just society. The data also suggests that these young people have relatively modest aspirations for themselves but that these are closely tied to their visions of an equitable society. While young people may very well be cynical about politics and many may be ignorant about the names of past Prime Ministers, they nevertheless have strong opinions about what might constitute a fair society. This has enormous implications for education. As the student whose words form part of the title for this paper said:

If young people are generally disinterested in party politics and disdainful of politicians (Beresford and Phillips, 1997, 14), but are committed to a more egalitarian society, then approaches to citizenship education must address these concerns in a practical way (Owen, 1996).

The data for this study are drawn from interviews with 48 respondents (29 male and 19 female) ranging in age from 15 to 24, with an average age of 18. Although 40 were born in Australia (this included a number of Indigenous people) and only eight were born overseas, a number of those who were born in Australia mentioned that one or both of their parents had migrated from another country (n=6). All thought of themselves as Australian. Almost half of the respondents (n=21) were in full-time education or training, thirteen were unemployed, nine were in full-time employment and a further five were doing 'other things' like volunteer work or travelling. The respondents included university students, private and public school students as well as young people who had left school at the earliest opportunity; they included young people from stable family backgrounds who lived in affluent suburbs and people who called the street home. In fact, on all sorts of indicators they were as diverse as any randomly selected group of people could be.

All interviews were conducted by Larissa and Lorenzo, aged nineteen. As a researcher I had decided not to conduct the interviews myself because I felt that interviewers who were closer in age to my target group would be able to elicit more 'truthful' responses. While the notion of 'truth' is problematic, nevertheless, I have a sense that Larissa and Lorenzo's interviews produced data that more closely approximated the reality of the people interviewed than would have been the case had they been approached by someone like me. Before going out into the field I had two briefing sessions with Larissa and Lorenzo during which we constructed an interview guide and discussed approaches to interviewing; their instructions were that, as far as they could ascertain, they were to interview young people from a range of cultural backgrounds.

While the respondents' replies differed along ethnic lines when answering questions relating to Australian identity, there were remarkable consistencies in responses which dealt with politics and social issues. Hence, while the answers provided by the older respondents tended to be more sophisticated in their articulation, there were no real discernible differences in the tenor of the responses in terms of age or gender. In fact, in one way or another, the majority of answers returned to the theme of social equality.

Excerpts from an interview which Lorenzo conducted with an seventeen year old, unemployed female who was born in Western Australia are reproduced below to give an indication of the range of questions asked. They also provide a flavour of the range of responses as they deal with voting behaviour, issues facing Australian society and issues of personal importance.

While not 'representative' (in an empirical sense) of this group of young people as a whole, the excerpt reproduced above is not atypical of the group of people interviewed in that it touches on many of the issues that were raised time and time again. Thus environmental issues and issues related to reconciliation with Aboriginal people (as well as issues concerned with equality more generally), questions of whether Australia should become a Republic and specific youth issues such as education and unemployment as well as issues relating to drugs, crime, homelessness and suicide were the most frequently cited issues to plague Australian society. The latter were invariably framed in terms of structural issues of inequality rather than as issues endemic to young people because of their youth. Certainly, the comment that "people just need to be heard in so many ways that they aren’t at the moment being heard, I feel", was not an isolated sentiment.

The majority of respondents did not have a high opinion of politicians. Indeed some of the comments regarding politicians do not bear repeating. Only eleven respondents (23%) thought politicians were doing a reasonable job. For example, one of the respondents commented:

Others felt that while their vote might make a difference in terms of who was to govern, they had no input into the ways in which we are governed or the policies of governance as the following shows:

As these quotations illustrate, lack of interest in politics appeared more a function of lack of interest in and cynicism about politicians and party politics than a lack of concern in local or indeed global issues or in the way democratic processes operate.

While this may well be a function of a system of compulsory voting, most of the respondents had voted or intended to vote when they were old enough (96%). When asked if they thought their vote could make a difference, by far the majority (83%) answered in the affirmative. The following give some indication of the responses:

The majority of respondents felt that their vote could make a difference, nevertheless, there were also some reservations. One respondent, for example, said that even though "voting is one of our democratic rights so we should use it", she felt that more could be achieved by "just looking out for the people around you — you can do a lot more that way". Another commented that he felt that his vote did not make a difference but that he had voted anyway because he wanted to avoid a fine. He indicated that his vote was influenced by his perception that "one side seemed slightly better than the other, you know, so I went with the lesser of two evils".

So how can the notion of one side of party politics appearing only marginally better than the other be understood; that is how is "slightly better" constructed and how can we understand the sentiment that "you can do more by just looking out for the people around you — you can do a lot more that way"? To begin to fathom these questions, it is illuminating to take a closer look at the issues that these young people said were important to them.

While many of the young people in this study said that they were not really interested in politics (81.6%), they nevertheless were interested in, and cared passionately about social issues. As Beresford and Phillips have suggested "a distinction needs to be drawn between interest in the political system and interest in political issues" (Beresford and Phillips, 1997, 16). Thus, of the total of 48 respondents only five (10.4%) said that they "didn't have a clue" when asked about issues facing Australian society. The others mentioned a range of issues, which when grouped together concerned the environment (mentioned 38 times), equity issues (mentioned 24 times) and issues of particular concern to young people (mentioned 19 times). Republicanism was mentioned ten times and taxes eight times.

The issues which this group of young people identified as being of concern to them often bore a direct relationship to issues that had occupied media attention at the time the individual was interviewed. Interestingly, schools were not mentioned at all as places where they had been made aware of particular issues. While certainly not the only source of information, the ways in which ideas and images of the main issues facing Australia at the turn of the millennium stem from media reports was evident in a number of interviews. For example, two respondents commented:

Another respondent appeared to have internalised constructions of youth (or perhaps he was merely commenting tongue-in-cheek?) as the following illustrates rather poignantly:

However, media construction of social reality were not always accepted unproblematically as the following show:

While one might have expected young people to be particularly concerned about issues affecting youth, this was not the case. When specific youth issues were mentioned by respondents, they included issues as diverse as drug taking and decriminalisation of certain types of prohibited substances, crime, suicide, homelessness, unemployment, education and a general sense that young people did not have a voice. On environmental and equity issues, however, those who mentioned it as an issue of concern agreed that government treatment of these issues appeared to be falling short of the mark. There were only two exceptions to this (4%). The young people in question expressed singularly racist opinions which found no echoes in the other responses.

The emphasis on social justice and environment issues is not altogether unexpected as a number of studies have shown that when young people are asked what they would do to make a difference, or what they felt constituted good citizens (Phillips and Moroz, 1996; Cope and Kalantzis, 1998), they tended to respond in terms of "a core of shared values" (Beresford and Phillips, 1996, 11). Thus Beresford and Phillips identified support for a racially non-discriminatory immigration policy, reconciliation with Aboriginal people, republicanism and a more egalitarian society (1997, 16) as belonging to a set of core values. Certainly the responses in the present study would support this idea. When asked to identify issues of concern the following are indicative of the range of responses:

Answers to the question "Is there anything the government do to improve society?" reflected the issues that concerned young people. While a proportion said that they had "no idea" (8%) and some conceded that this was a "tough question" (12%), the majority had a great deal to say about what government could do. Some answered succinctly:

Others attempted to voice solutions to the problems they perceived, despite having been 'put on the spot' to consider rather weighty issues. Their answers frequently showed how they struggled to articulate their thoughts:

Some of these ideas may be idealistic, however, they illustrate the range of responses and closely relate to the core values expressed by other young people in other studies (for example, Beresford and Phillips, 1996).

Responses to the question "If you were the Prime Minister of Australia, what would you do to change things?", not surprisingly again mirrored the issues of concern that were identified and elicited acknowledgment that it might be one thing to want government to take action but quite another to actually find oneself in that position of responsibility. Thus a number commented along the following lines:

On the other hand, there were some interesting ideas which were captured succinctly by the respondents who simply saw the 'solution' to problems (but not the method of arriving at those solutions) and said: "I’d just try and make everyone equal"; "give a lot more say and power to Aboriginals" and "do something about all the homeless people you see around the place". Others thought carefully about what their priorities might be and showed a remarkable grasp of the complexities of the issues under discussion.

Even given the often superficial and frequently negative comments in the media concerning, for example, land rights for Indigenous people, these young people were not persuaded by the scare tactics surrounding land rights and a subsequent decline in national prosperity. Nor were they oblivious to the light of forestry workers. They had formed their own opinions about what was right and fair in ways that attempted to take all sides of the srgument into account. Others worried about funding for health-care and education, as well as the position of women under a conservative government and employed quite sophisticated analyses to make their point.

So-called 'youth issues' were another area that came under scathing attack from some of the respondents. Sometimes they spoke from personal experience, at other times they drew on their general knowledge to critique government policies and spending. It is interesting to note that education was valued and seen as having a crucial role to play in producing better informed citizens, even though for some education had not been an entirely positive experience.

The final question was framed in very personal terms: "Politics aside, what's important to you personally?" and consequently elicited very personal responses which showed some evidence that aspirations for the future might be linked to socio-economic status. For example, those respondents who came from more affluent backgrounds generally answered in terms of wanting things like happiness, enjoyment and sometimes included references to "making something of myself". They said:

On the other hand, those young people who were struggling to make ends meet, expressed more concrete aspirations that centred on simply meeting basic needs of food and shelter. Their responses are indicative of the hardships some of them have experienced and express the hope that in the future life would offer some of the things that their more priviledged contemporaries took for granted. When asked what wa simportant to them, they simply said:

Older respondents and those with more formal education tended to be more expansive and saw their personal happiness bound up with a healthy society and an orientation towards community rather than profit. These comments reflect an understanding that social inequalities exist and that despite the rhetoric, all Australians do not share in the benefits of a prosperous society.

Certainly, these young people aspired to the basic necessities in life, as well as a degree of personal happiness but they were also able to articulate the ways in which personal happiness and 'looking out for number one' were not their sole concerns. They echo the respondent quoted earlier who was disenchanted with the political system and said: "you can do more by just looking out for the people around you — you can do a lot more that way"? In fact, the majority of respondents in this study showed a great deal of idealism about ways in which society might operate as well as concern for the well-being of humanity and the future of the planet.

While some survey research has suggested that young people today are cynical, pessimistic and disengaged, the Youth Partnership Study which involved a series of scenario-developed workshops showed that young Australians have a capacity for "idealism, altruism and optimism about the future that needs greater recognition and encouragement" (Eckersley, 1996, 11). Given these outcomes, Eckersley has argued that more must be done in schools to nurture the "conviction that the future is theirs to shape" (Eckersley, 1996, 17). In concert with Eckersley and on the basis of the present study's findings, I would argue that if the call for educating a more active and involved citizenry is not to dissipate into the response that "learning about politics is boring" (Phillip and Moroz, 1996, 17), then educational programs must take a different approach and begin with young people's concerns. Thus Phillip and Moroz (1996) have presented data which suggests that what is missing in citizenship education are discussions of 'rights'. They commented:

Given that the concerns expressed by the young people who participated in this present study are not entirely idiosyncratic, they could well provide a starting point for classroom discussions within the context of citizenship education. However, discussions will of themselves, not necessarily contribute to the creation of more informed and active citizens. Young people need to have their views and opinions taken seriously. They also need to feel that their voices are heard and that they can play an active part in shaping a more socially just society. At the same time they need to be taught critical literacy skills that will enable them to deconstruct media 'truths' as well as their own ideological constructions. This is not an easy task and is likely to ruffle some more conservative feathers if the responses following recent examples of student activism are any indication.

For example, during the massive walk-out by high school students in 1998 to protest the rise of Hansonist racism, editorials across the country were unanimous in their condemnation of the action: some suggested that the demonstrations were an attack on freedom speech; the NSW opposition leader was quoted as saying "I believe that student diversion from their core activity, that is, learning in schools, is something that should not be encouraged"; others suggested that the demonstrators didn't quite understand the implications of their actions and had somehow been duped and manipulated into participating (Healy, 1999, 207). More recently, following the nation-wide May Day action protesting the negative effects of a global economy, the Prime Minister John Howard commented on radio that the school-age young people who participated in the protest were "pawns in political protest" and that they "ought to be in schools, that's all they should do" (ABC Radio News, 1st May, 2001). Given this mindset, it becomes "difficult to understand why citizenship should be viewed by young people as other than something that will happen later" (Owen, 1996, 21). As Owen has further suggested:

Despite the overwhelming convictions that young people should be passive recipients of schooling and not become active citizens until they were able to make more 'mature' judgements, some schools have taken the leap to address this critical gap in education and have opened up to other possibilities of 'doing' citizenship education. Thus Munter (1996) described one school which has taken young people's concerns as their starting point. This particular school developed programs that follow the nationally developed studies of society and environment statement and profile, and within that framework encouraged students to take a stand on issues of concern: to paint banners, write letters and even participate in demonstrations. One teacher commented:

Thus in the final analysis, it is how we run our schools, rather that what we teach in them, that will determine levels of active citizenship. As Wilson has argued:

If, as I have argued young people are generally disinterested in party politics and disdainful of politicians, but are committed to a more egalitarian society, then approaches to citizenship education must address these concerns and must be included as part of the 'core activities' of schools in ways that model participatory democratic processes.