Proceeding contribution from Lord Glentoran (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 24 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on Sport in the Community.
Sport in the Community
My Lords, I feel a little timorous about speaking at this Dispatch Box today as I am still recovering from a very memorable evening at Admiralty House last night where I was the guest of none other than the Minister for Sport, Richard Caborn, and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Tessa Jowell. However, I am sure that the Minister will be disappointed if I do not attempt to offer some constructive criticisms of Her Majesty’s Government’s performance regarding looking after sporting activity in the community. I start by thanking the noble Lord, Lord Pendry, for once again initiating a debate on sport in your Lordships’ House. This has been no less lively and informative than any previous debate on sport. The prospect of the Olympic Games in London in 2012 has served to focus public and parliamentary attention on the highest level of sporting achievement. However, this debate has proved a pertinent reminder that it is at grassroots level that investment of both time and money needs to be made in order to find athletes for tomorrow. We have established that sport plays a crucial role within communities, encouraging group participation, teaching new skills, breaking down barriers and encouraging a healthy way of living, all of which are essential in today’s cultural climate. Sport teaches essential skills and values of life—teamwork, discipline, communication and self-confidence. It also instils a competitive spirit and drive. It can do that only if facilities and safe instruction are readily available. The Government are keen to promote sport as a means of reducing crime and obesity; so are we. They do much to highlight our sporting triumphs; for example, the bus tour of the victorious Ashes team. Yet, in reality, HMG has so far done little at grassroots level. The power of sport to influence those who find little else in life which appeals should not be underestimated. David Beckham, Jonny Wilkinson, Freddie Flintoff and Kelly Holmes—all sporting heroes—have far greater influence than merely within their own sport. A wide range of initiatives is needed to focus on those most likely to be disillusioned and least likely to take part in extracurricular sport—the economically disadvantaged groups, young people and ethnic minorities. The continuity between school and club sports seems still to be almost non-existent despite the efforts by school sport co-ordinator programmes to strengthen these links and despite efforts by my party when in government and by the current Government. The dropout rate at school leaving age is still alarming. The country needs to maintain a wider pool of across-the-board talent to compete on a world-class scale. Initiatives are needed to tackle motivational barriers such as time and cost as well as failures in provision; in particular of playing fields and sports grounds. It seems that a review of the usage of sports grounds is needed. I heard what the noble Lord, Lord Addington, said just now, but I believe that the sharing of sports grounds should be more common, as should programming to maximise the amount of time that any facility is in use. That facility does not need to be a rugby pitch. We are told that overall number of participants in various sports have increased, but that the actual number of hours the average person spends exercising has decreased. For 2001 to 2004, DCMS had a public service agreement target to raise significantly, year on year, the average time spent on sport and physical activity by those aged five to 16. The DCMS annual report for 2003 admitted that the average amount of time spent on sport and physical activity by five to 16 year-olds had declined since 1999. Overall, 69 per cent of pupils in partnership schools participate in at least two hours of high-quality PE and school sport in a typical week. Therefore, even after four years of a school being in a partnership, 30 per cent of the pupils are not spending two hours a week on PE. It is difficult to see how the Government will reach the target of 75 per cent of all school pupils doing so by 2006 given that many schools are not yet part of a partnership. How do HMG intend to achieve that within the time frame that they have set themselves in their manifesto? Political correctness is now having a serious negative impact on young people in sport. For example, it is suggested that children should not play competitive games, because losing is demoralising. Dance teachers are frightened to touch pupils, which is essential for activities like ballet where teachers are required to move pupils’ limbs in order to change position and posture. Extracurricular activities such as Outward Bound are similarly declining in popularity. I declare an interest here, having led an Outward Bound team for two years in the services, in which time we took 850 young men a term into the mountains and to the rivers. That decline is in part due to the growth of a compensation culture in UK schools. Schools and clubs are frightened to take youngsters away from home, or to encourage them to try new activities where risk may be involved, such as riding a horse or rock-climbing, for fear of being sued. In 2003, one child died as a result of an incident on a school visit. But more than 7 million children went on school visits that year. There is concern that people who act with reasonable care and skill could be held liable for untoward incidents, which will be a disincentive for teachers and parents to accept roles of responsibility and make insurance almost impossible. I had that debate with Richard Caborn last night, and he is very concerned to try to find a way out of it. The ratio of adults to children in different age groups should be kept under constant review and is spelt out in the guide to good practice. However, the review process should ensure that the opportunity for young people to participate in all sorts of sports and outdoor activities is not restricted. Added to the dilemmas raised by health and safety and political correctness are those of bureaucracy and complicated paperwork. The Government announced on 16 September 2005 that from 1 April 2006 a one-stop approach to high-performance sport would be created by transferring full responsibility for its funding and development to UK Sport. The Independent Sports Review by my noble friend Lord Moynihan and Kate Hoey produced a report, Raising the Bar, which considers that the Government’s plan to shift responsibility for world-class development to UK Sport does not go far enough. On another front, having improved the lot of CASCs by giving mandatory rate relief at 80 per cent if they are registered as a charity, the Government have now landed them with the Licensing Act, which has increased costs and caused further confusion. Maldon Cricket Club, when asked about the impact of the Licensing Act, replied that there are two types of cost—financial and time—and went through how they add up. The cost of the licence was £100, plus a £70 annual charge, so the total cost so far has been a minimum of 15 hours spent and £384, and the club has still not yet been told whether it has a licence. The regulatory impact assessment accompanying the regulations estimates that about 20,000 non-profit-making members’ clubs would be affected by the new fees. Many clubs will lose a valuable source of revenue as they will not apply for the expensive new licence. The Government rhetoric about investment in community sport sounds positive, but the reality of the figures is shocking. In 2000, the Government pledged to invest £750 million of lottery money into school and community sport as part of a £1 billion investment over three years—fantastic. That was supposed to be joined-up government, including the departments responsible for health, education, crime and drugs. I wonder whether the Home Office, the Department of Health or the Department for Education and Skills got the message. Updated figures revealed on 6 June 2005 show that still only £70.4 million of the £750 million has been spent, although £620 million has now been committed—I believe as a result of the current Minister for Sport’s boot being used in the right direction. The managerial costs of the various sports bodies are phenomenally high. Raising the Bar reveals that the administration costs for Sport England in 2003–04 accounted for 30 per cent of its £52.5 million budget, whereas the Millennium Commission kept its overheads to 4 per cent. Nearly £14 million was spent on consultancy costs, administration for the regional sports boards and staff costs for the regional sports councils. The English Institute of Sport—the EIS—cost £120 million to establish and had £7.9 million in administration costs in 2003–04 and £8.5 million in the most recent tax year. The new Sports Foundation proposed by Raising the Bar would review the assets of the EIS, incorporate the services that are in demand and discontinue the others. I am sure that noble Lords will agree that those figures are truly shocking. What are the Government going to do to reduce that bureaucratic waste? Sport in the community is being hindered at every move by new restrictive government legislation, health and safety and political correctness. The point of increasing the amount of sport in the curriculum is to encourage group participation, exploration and confidence, none of which can be achieved if all risk is removed. Whether it is the local football team or our Olympic athletes, sport can draw together a wide spectrum of diverse people and focus their energies into a channelled direction. Without the challenge of team sports and the adrenaline of outdoor activities such as caving and mountaineering, there is little to attract people away from their computer games and television sets. None of these activities need be high risk as long as the coaches or group leaders are properly trained. In summary, community sport has of recent times been in the doldrums, the major issues being an over-bureaucratic approach by government, which makes the routes to funding difficult; political correctness; and overbearing health and safety regulations creating a culture of claims and fear by those responsible—something which I know the Government and we are keen to remove. Added to that is the eternal problem of maintaining young people’s interest in sport and outdoor activities after they leave school. The crossover from school to club is still desperately in need of a support mechanism. The great outdoors and community sport have so much to offer to all of us, and it must be the duty of all governments to maximise those assets.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 675 c1793-7
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Access Boating Women Health and safety Football Physical education Obesity Playing fields Schools Young people Regulation Sportsgrounds Sports Walking Rivers Exercise Cricket Academies Angling
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 10:52:19 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_280213
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_280213
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_280213