THE HERALD REPORTS

Politicians must play the game – for the good of Scottish sportDOUG GILLON September 19 2007
I doubt if I am alone in being concerned that a group of civil servants are reviewing how the Scottish National Party should fulfil its election manifesto pledge to abolish sportscotland.

I have no problem in principal with the quango's restructuring, but I have one over what replaces it. It may not be perfect, but the functions it performs and its expertise will remain essential to Scottish sport, whether the agency itself exists or not.

So who decides how the government's sport advisory arm is amputated and how a replacement may be grafted on? If I require surgery, I don't want a civil servant deciding how and where the cuts should be made. I would want the best consultant surgeon. Yet none of the numerous leisure or business consultancies have been charged with evaluating sportscotland.

If the future of sport is being decided - which it is - then it should be determined by people who understand its intricacies and conflicting loyalties, who empathise with what it stands for, and what it means to those who play it, in all its shapes, sizes and manifestations.

People who understand why anyone would stand for a lifetime in freezing fog, rain, hail or shine. Not in the hope of nurturing an Olympic champion, or the next McCoist, Fleeting or McStay, but because somebody once did it for them. Because they understand sport is an enriching experience.

I'd like this assessment to be conducted by people who understand what sport coaches and volunteers require, and what motivates them and those whom they mentor. By people who understand and value their contribution. Who recognise beauty and style in the intrinsic grace of movement, courage in risking one's neck on the judo mat or driving a horse at a 6ft fence, passion in gambling one's dream on a split-second, life-defining decision 300 metres from the Olympic finish line.

By people who recognise what it takes to achieve those things and can deliver what develops it: nutrition, medical, scientific, biomechanical, and psychological back-up. By people who understand why one may require a conditioning gym next to a running track. Why free weights might be preferable to machines. Why an Olympic wrestling mat is no substitute for a judo one. Why there should be at least two metres between badminton courts. Why you are unlikely to need a new five-a-side sportshall in one village, four new badminton courts in another nearby, and a basketball court in a third a few miles down the road (because one hall would provide all three).

How much of that do civil servants understand, and do they care? Yet it is they who will inform government ministers who will make the decision. Thus far, nobody has consulted the Scottish Sports Association, which represents all sport governing bodies.

Though it is comforting to learn a meeting is planned. Scottish Office sports division bureaucrats might then ask what requirements are, but this process should be fundamental. All sports should be consulted. Otherwise it reflects the arrogance of people who think they know better. It would lead the sport community to question whether government has their interests at heart. They might even suspect civil servants of orchestrating their masters' agenda, rather than keeping an open mind.

Even the sternest sports critics acknowledge the need for sportscotland's existence in some guise. That could be a sport ministry, with staff rebranded civil servants. They would at least have the essential qualification of having served a sport apprenticeship.

What is not required is a takeover by civil service sports philistines. The review's report is due by the end of the year. It will dictate the agenda at a time of unique opportunity, coinciding with preparation for the 2012 London Olympics, and hopefully the 2014 Commonwealth Games.

An unrivalled chance to create beneficial links between sport and education, grass-roots activity, health, equality, social inclusion. This presents the possibility of initiatives to address increased physical education on the curriculum, obesity and health issues, drugs, vandalism. A government which fails to grasp this would lack vision, and one which discarded all expertise would be grossly negligent.

Restructured? Certainly. Relocated? Possibly. Renamed? Frankly, who cares, as long as it does what it says on the label.

It has been suggested the three national outdoor centres be hived off as non-profit charitable trusts, and the Scottish Institute of Sport and area institutes operated separately.

Yet what is needed is an over-arching integrated process, policies, and strategy. Not fragmentation, particularly in funding, only recently integrated into a one-stop shop.

As a government department, sportscotland or its successor could have no part in disbursing lottery funding. Nor could it act as independent government advisor on issues like selling school playing fields.

"Decluttering" is the clumsy buzzword of reformers. But funding would become more complex. Governing bodies would find themselves mired in funding applications: to central and local government, the lottery, National Playing Fields Association, local and and national sports institutes. It would set one sport against another, to nobody's advantage.

We need a government initiative that involves a shared vision to make our nation proud. What is required is what is best for sport.

This article was posted on 19-Sep-2007, 07:06 by Hugh Barrow.