Youth Parliament kicked off with bold claims being thrown by Youth MPs. They whistle-blowed to media that organisers were censoring explicit criticism of the government in speeches. The excuse organisers used was to enforce the non-partisan nature of this event, but what they didn’t say is, they weren’t the only members of Youth Parliament who were being sanitised.

It quickly became clear that the Youth Parliament was not going to be a genuine, transparent debate of the issues that matter most to young people. Both Youth MPs and members of the Youth Press Gallery found themselves censored by a government that seemed to be afraid of their voices.

One Youth MP, who didn’t want to be named, made a speech during the first debate session saying the Ministry of Youth Development had edited the first draft, re-angling the message. The speech, like several others, spoke on current government programs in place for young people to receive support. “Every time I referenced a specific organisation, [MYD] changed it to ‘system’, it got to the point where I said ‘system’ three times in one sentence.” Another said they had to rewrite their speech three times. While name-dropping political figures is grounds for concern, trying to suppress speeches critical of current governmental ‘systems’ is bound to cause a stir.

The Youth Press Gallery members were encouraged by the MYD to reach out and pitch stories independently. Being selected felt like we were given access to exclusive discussions and drama. We had our story, angled on the controversies of the day, with a response from the Youth Minister, James Meager. After finishing a draft, the brakes were slammed on us by the communications team. We were informally told that every article we wrote would have to go through their team to be edited, before forwarding it to media outlets.

Having a story edited by ministry officials inherently breaches most media organisations' editorial guidelines, and it created a delay that meant we lost the story. Within an hour, Meager’s statement was released to other media, and we were beaten to the punch. The idea that the youth press is meant to report nothing but vetted articles while ignoring the public news of the day is disheartening. Nobody wants to publish a story that’s days old.

The censorship controversy continued to fester. We kept in touch with Meager’s office and he maintained the narrative that there was no censorship. "The Ministry is responsible for the well-being of participants in the programme,” affirming the same point from the presser. “This includes ensuring things they say and publish aren’t defamatory.” According to him, it was up to us to publish whatever we wanted to whoever we wanted, although it really didn’t feel like it.

As the censorship story continued to unfold day by day, the media angle changed from ‘censorship is happening’ to ‘Youth MPs can’t decide if there is censorship’. The change came after Youth MPs from the other side of the political divide came forward, saying they weren’t censored. An impromptu press conference was organised on the steps of Parliament by a coalition of government-affiliated Youth MPs. He claimed the censorship allegations were part of a wider agenda projected by a select group of Youth MPs. “They tend to come from a certain ‘side of the house’,” he said. He was backed by Youth MPs affiliated with National, Act and NZ First. A little too on the nose for an event meant to be non-partisan. They can’t really be blamed, the youth does take after their role models at parliament – the partisan one.

The Youth Parliament’s concept of non-partisanship is inherently absurd. It’s important to let young people decide and change their party affiliations as they grow; but expecting a program that puts over one hundred highly politicised youth into a room and expecting it to run according to plan is naïve, and it’s even more naïve to believe that it won’t be reported on.

Party affiliations and political views are the perfect icebreaker at these kinds of events, but a group of young people united by shared politics and given a national platform is a risky mix. As we wandered the Beehive banquet hall looking for a spot to eat our fish & chips, we spotted a table with some seats free, but as we went to sit down a voice called out, “this is the NZ First table.” The members of what was meant to be a non-partisan event seemed to be quickly forming partisan groups.

Despite the controversies, many Youth MPs we spoke to say the chaos only made their spark for politics grow brighter. The injustices many felt in the chamber while being censored will likely only lead to more discussion, anger and passion outside of the House. We asked Deborah Russell’s Youth MP, Gayle Bain, who spoke out against the current government, if she’s been discouraged. “No,” she said, “if anything, I’m more fired up than before.”

If we take anything away from Youth Parliament 2025, it’s that young people are ready to have their voices heard.

© Scoop Media