| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Sir Colin Shepherd: Some of the schools can still opt out of the visiting process by saying that they cannot afford it, so we have to maintain pressure on the schools concerned, especially on those that do not come up to the mark, and ensure that they cannot cop out on that basis. How is that to be done?
Mrs. Browning: My hon. Friend makes an extremely good point. We shall certainly talk to the Commission about how that is to be effected, because it is clearly unacceptable for schools to opt out simply through lack of finance. I can assure my hon. Friend that I will investigate the matter and will pursue it as vigorously as possible.
We await the proposals of the Commission for simplification as a result of the SLIM initiative with respect to mutual recognition of professional qualifications. We shall want to discuss that with the various bodies in the United Kingdom including, of course, the RCVS, but before we can agree to any proposal for change we would have to take into account the potential costs both to Europe and to the United Kingdom of inadequate standards of veterinary training. If the standards were inadequate, the possible cost would be unacceptable to many of us in the House. I am anxious that the House should be aware of our determination in the matter.
The Government continue to support the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons in its efforts to ensure the maintenance of high standards of veterinary education throughout the EU. Coincidentally, I have a meeting in my diary for three weeks' time with the RCVS and in view of the case made by my hon. Friend, I shall raise the matter with it then.
1 pm
Miss Kate Hoey (Vauxhall): I am grateful to have the opportunity to raise the question of the British academy of sport when there is great uncertainty about its future. Time runs out at 12 o'clock tomorrow for the bids to own and run the academy. Some £100 million is on offer from the national lottery to guarantee sporting success but no one, even at this stage, knows how that success will be achieved and who for.
The Minister has been economical, to say the least, with his vision. Since the academy was announced in "Raising the Game" in July 1995--the principle of the academy has been accepted and supported by the Labour party and, indeed, all parties for some time--the Minister has said very little. In a debate last year, the Minister said that bids would be invited after consultation. He continued:
A potentially far-reaching proposal has been hindered by lack of clear direction from the Government. Even those closest to the idea--the bidders, the sports bodies, the centres of excellence and the coaches--are stumbling around in the dark. The Minister appears to be unable to get off the starting blocks and there has been indecision and uncertainty about how the academy will proceed. Just one day before the bids close, the British academy of sport is as unclear as the hereafter is to mortals. We all have a different image of paradise and that is how it is with the academy--everyone has an idea, but nobody has co-ordinated those ideas.
The Government have spectacularly failed to supply the vision. Where have they laid out their view in any detail? Do they have a view of the details of the academy? The 56-page prospectus provokes more questions and concerns than it gives answers and reassurance. The sporting world is at a loss and is unsure whether any of the practical questions will be addressed. We all agree that we want an academy.
Ownership of the academy will be in the hands of a new consortium and its remit will include the need to search for commercial viability. Does that mean that the new owners will have to turn to running ad hoc fitness regimes for middle managers to make money or to other non-sporting events to earn the cash? Will we see the academy hosting wedding receptions, for example? Surely the academy should be run by sport for sport and sport alone.
One of the great unknown factors, which causes the most serious concerns, is who will pay the on-going revenue costs of running the academy. On a practical level, for example, who will pay for the young people to attend the academy on sponsorships? Will it be the academy itself or the governing body of the relevant sport? What will be the role of the young people's coaches? Will their personal coaches and mentors have a role to play? Who will pay the coaches and how will that be decided? What will be the role of local education authorities? Young people are the responsibility of the local education authority. Will the academy have the power to require athletes and sportsmen and women to
break the link with their local or regional clubs or the power to decide which events they participate in? Who will have priority in selection? That is especially important because of the vast sums of money involved in some sports and the ability and desire of athletes to decide where they will take part. Who will make that choice?
The academy will, we are told, cover sports medicine, but we have had no clarification of how those medical services will be provided. Will the physiotherapy and pharmacy services be provided by the national health service or someone else? More important, what guarantee will there be that the home country sports councils will always co-operate with and participate in the financing of the academy? The royal charters give them independence, but what will happen if they choose to exercise that independence? In an article in The Times yesterday, David Miller wrote:
Incidentally, can the Minister tell us what the status of the English and the United Kingdom sports councils and their royal charters is at the moment? Why has the English Sports Council not met officially for a year? Why is it taking so long to get the financial memorandum sorted out? What confidence can we have in the future of the academy if the setting up of the UK Sports Council and its relationship with the other sports councils has still not been resolved? Surely we owe more to the new chief executive of the UK Sports Council, Howard Wells, and to the chairman, Sir Ian MacLaurin. They must be allowed to get on with the job and the problems must be sorted out quickly.
The academy should be a linchpin in a strategy for success in British sport, but it will not succeed unless there is a clear structure, from primary schools to clubs to the national level, with bodies identifying talent and pushing it on to the next stage. Were the school sports associations specifically asked to contribute? We all want success, but of course we do not need muddle. If we are to take the country with us on an expensive academy, there is no room for muddle. Everybody needs to be aware of just what the academy can do for the individual youngster, boy or girl, who has the potential to succeed. The public must know that the academy can do something for such young people. We need much more clarity on the subject.
A number of questions still have not been answered, but they are not new. The sports' governing bodies have been raising those questions with anyone and everyone for some time and I hope that the Minister will take this opportunity to answer them.
Will the Minister also clarify his role in the set-up? How will the national sports recreation centres fit into the new plans? Are they being sidelined in any way? Surely all those issues should have been agreed with the relevant governing bodies before the prospectus was issued. The UK Sports Council, the governing bodies and the British Olympic Association will be crucial whichever bid wins. What will be the involvement of those bodies and why has the Minister not been able to secure more agreement on the proposals before starting the bidding process?
Will governing bodies lose their grants for elite training or will they be free to send competitors to train in camps overseas if that best suits their needs? Elite sport sounds glamorous, but it comes from the grass roots. It is long term and expensive and there are no guarantees. Many of our great champions get to the top despite rather than because of the system. Some people are critical of giving money to the excellent. All of us who care about sport believe that we must have excellence at the top, but the pyramid must be as wide as possible at the bottom. I am not clear about how those links will be achieved.
The National Coaching Foundation should play a key role in the decisions on how the academy should be run. An article in the autumn edition of its newsletter was headed "Bricks and mortar, but too little vision?" It was critical of the fact that many of the proposals in the 56-page document are not clear. Bidders are not being given a clear direction in which to go. The Minister should explain how the details will work out in practice. We all want the academy to be established, but if bidders are not able to take account of the different factors, whoever wins will have to talk to sports bodies to ascertain the requirements of any particular sport. Much of that work could have been done already.
Even though the Minister has slightly changed his mind about the use of a huge green-field, 200-acre site for the academy, the 56 pages of that document were based on the premise that it would still be a green-field site. Does the Minister accept that consultations with the sports governing bodies showed that there was no support for a large green-field site for the academy? We already have centres of expertise. We need a pinnacle--an administrative and co-ordination centre--but it must be in touch with what is happening in the regions.
"They will be assessed by the Sports Council, which will announce its decision next summer."--[Official Report, 27 October 1995; Vol. 264, c. 1223.]
It is now nearly November and not a single bid has even been opened. What has led to that delay?
"Sir Rodney Walker, the chairman of the England Sports Council . . . has said . . . that if the England Sports Council does not approve of the choice of academy site by the UK body, it will not allocate the £100 million of National Lottery funds that has been set aside for it."
Will the Minister comment on that statement? After we have been through the whole process, will someone, somewhere, decide that they have a veto over the money?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |