Lord Coe vowed the London Olympics would connect young people with the inspirational power of the Games, but there are now real fears this goal will not be realised
Around two and a half months before the cream of the world's athletes parade around the track at the opening ceremony of the London Games, a rather more low-key event will mark a new phase in the battle to secure an Olympic legacy ? or at least the perception of one.
The School Games, the brainchild of the culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt, is ? depending on who you ask and their political persuasion ? either a bold attempt to reinvigorate competitive school sport using London 2012 as a catalyst or a desperate attempt to distract from deep spending cuts that risk putting any hope for a meaningful legacy at risk.
The finals, which will take place in the Olympic Park between 6 and 9 May, are the climax of four levels of intra- and inter-school competition that Hunt insists will help deliver on the legacy promises made by Lord Coe in Singapore.
Then, Coe vowed: "We can no longer take it for granted that young people will choose sport. Some may lack the facilities. Or the coaches and role models to teach them. Others, in an age of 24-hour entertainment and instant fame, may simply lack the desire. We are determined a London Games will address that challenge. So London's vision is to reach young people around the world. To connect them with the inspirational power of the Games. So they are inspired to choose sport."
There are now very real fears that Coe's electrifying words will result in little meaningful change. The background is complex and controversial, marked by political and ideological rows and turf wars.
In 2010 the education secretary, Michael Gove, resolved to remove the �162m ringfenced funding for a network of school sports partnerships that had raised the number of schoolchildren engaged in two hours or more of sport per week from 25% in 2002 to more than 90% by 2010.
Following a feisty debate in the Commons (during which the shadow health secretary, Andy Burnham, suggested the cuts were Gove's revenge for years of misery on the playing fields) and a furious rearguard action from teachers, pupils and athletes, some of the money was reinstated. But it was less a U-turn and more a 90-degree turn.
Sue Campbell, the redoubtable chair of the Youth Sport Trust, and her new chief executive, John Steele, are putting a brave face on the new strategy. Campbell says it can be the start of a renaissance for competitive school sport.
But while a total of �153m will be going into the School Games over the next four years ? gathered from a variety of sources and including �10m of sponsorship from Sainsbury's ? it doesn't make up for what has been lost.
Meanwhile, behind the scenes, there was also a pitched battle for control of the School Games themselves. Lord Moynihan, the British Olympic Association chairman, thought that its remit after the Games could usefully extend to running a school Olympics. But Hunt said on Monday that the BOA wanted complete control, which wasn't on the table. So the name was changed to the School Games and the BOA sidelined.
Hunt also lauded the fact that half of all schools had signed up. By the same token, that means that half of schools haven't ? in London the total is only 42%.
The risk is that we will be left with a patchwork of provision between those schools that understand the wider value of sport and those that don't ? exactly what the original strategy was introduced to combat. There is no such hesitation at private schools which pour their considerable funds into top-class sporting facilities and as a result have punched well above their weight at recent Games, supplying half of all Britain's medallists.
Hunt deserves praise for doing what he can with limited resources to try to minimise the effect of the cuts imposed by Gove and he loyally defends the actions of his colleague.
But it is hard to see how sacking 450 people, then re-employing the majority of them on fewer hours with a re-badged job title and simultaneously cutting the primary school provision that could instil the very "sport for life" attitude that Hunt's rhetoric promises can be seen as a step forward.
For all the economic gloom, and the inevitable cuts, the London Games should have been a moment to definitively rebalance Britain's relationship with sport and exercise ? beginning in schools, and particularly in primary schools.
Ministers from all departments are keen to pay lip service to sport's role as a social tool ? inspiring otherwise hard to reach children, raising academic achievement and self-esteem. But not enough of them are willing to find the means. This is difficult stuff and the societal and cultural barriers are immense. But that does not mean the original aim ? to use the Olympics to catalyse a lasting change in sports policy and the amount we invest in it ? was wrong.
For all the money poured into school sport by the last Labour government when times were good, they arguably didn't do enough to hardwire investment in sport and exercise into bigger Whitehall departments such as health, education and the Home Office.
Now the money they did provide is leaking away. Nor does there seem much clarity on how progress will be measured ? Hunt talks vaguely of instilling the habit of "sport for life" and measuring progress at 16, 18 and 21. Which means it will be years before we know if the strategy works.
There are other pressing concerns. Cuts to local authority budgets will inevitably impact on facilities, and the effects are just starting to be felt. Meanwhile, planning laws are being changed in a way that has raised fears about the impact on playing fields.
Hunt spoke at a briefing this week of wanting to follow the example of continental Europe and create community sports clubs of the kind that will be familiar to anyone who has spent time in the Netherlands, Germany or France. That is a laudable aim, but is hard to see how the mishmash of policies and initiatives ? individually impressive as some of them are ? that has been cobbled together to assuage concerns over the Olympic legacy can achieve it. Hunt's enthusiasm seems genuine, but it is hard to avoid the suspicion that the government as a whole increasingly views the Games as a month-long morale-boosting advert for Britain rather than a driver of lasting change.
Coe, loyally, insists that the coalition is delivering on his promises by reinvigorating competitive sport. But others are less sure ? from opposite sides of the political divide both Tessa Jowell and Moynihan have expressed confidence in the regeneration vision for east London and Team GB's medal hopes but flagged up school sport as an area of grave concern.
The danger is that after the Games, Britain's attitude to sport will remain broadly unchanged ? world-class at watching it, and sometimes at practising it at the elite end, but with a population largely happy to take part from the comfort of their sofa with a big bowl of crisps.
Stadium wrap leaves a little to be designed
London 2012 organisers are close to unveiling the design for the contentious wrap that will surround the stadium at Games-time, but Damien Hirst and other big-name British artists who were initially approached will not be involved.
The �7m wrap that will surround the main stadium during the Games is at the centre of protests from MPs and human rights groups over the fact it is being paid for by Dow, the chemicals giant which they claim still has outstanding liabilities relating to the 1984 Bhopal disaster in India.
Initial plans for the 1km wrap were scrapped during the government's comprehensive spending review as the �9.3bn Olympics project shared some of the pain of widespread spending cuts, but revived when a commercial sponsor was found.
However, the original designs for the wrap were abandoned and a push to find a new designer was launched. Hirst and other British artists were approached but it is understood that talks went no further than preliminary conversations.
Barry Gardiner, the Labour MP who has called for a parliamentary review of the decision to back Dow, told the Guardian that any prominent British artists would be damaged by their association with the wrap.
"I can't imagine the artistic community of the UK feeling that Dow Chemical, with all its history, is a sponsor they particularly want to associate themselves with. I would be gobsmacked if any eminent British artist decided that what they wanted to do was associate themselves with the Bhopal tragedy."
Sir Humphrey doesn't take the train
Harassed civil servants across Whitehall were this week expected to "reroute and remode" their journeys to work in order to practise for Games-time. The transport secretary, Justine Greening, has already promised that her department will achieve a decrease of 50% in normal traffic by working from home and travelling at different times. Games organisers are relying on an average reduction of 30% among London commuters to avoid transport chaos. Posters pinned up around the DCMS building urged staff to partake in the week-long rehearsal. And Ian Watmore, the former FA chief executive who is now leading a Whitehall cost-cutting drive, tweeted: "This week we are practising for the Olympics by working out of London or on flexible shifts. Today I'm heading to Norwich from Manchester."
No comments:
Post a Comment