Examination of Witnesses (Questions 272
- 279)
TUESDAY 3 FEBRUARY 2004
HERITAGE LOTTERY
FUND AND
UK SPORT
Chairman: Ladies, thank you very much
for coming. I am sorry to have kept you waiting, but we had an
important piece of private business that took somewhat longer
than I anticipated due to the fact that the Committee wanted to
discuss it. Michael Fabricant.
Q272 Michael Fabricant: Ms Campbell,
given that there is Sport England, Sport Scotland, Sport Wales,
Sport Northern Ireland, what actually is UK Sport for?
Ms Campbell: It is a very good
question.
Q273 Michael Fabricant: Thank you.
Ms Campbell: We have been working
very closely with the home countries, particularly over the last
six months, to ask that very question: what value do we add and
why do we need a UK Sport? I think there is very clear consensus
from all four of them that we can add value and that our value
really sits around three key areas. The first is world class performance.
That is where athletes, particularly, are performing on a UK stage—so
in the Olympic Games—where they are representing Britain
as a nation, as a whole nation, and how we prepare those athletes,
the coaches and the systems that support those athletes. So that
is our world class sport, world class performance. The other area
is our world class influence. We have already a significant impact
internationally as a UK body and certainly our view is that, both
in terms of world class influence and as a result of that influence,
attracting world class events to the UK is a significant role
for us to play but clearly working very much in partnership with
the home countries. The third area is the whole area of world
class standards, making sure that our world class athletes working
on a world class stage are representing the very best of sport,
which involves our drugs testing, our drugs education and also
our sporting education programme. So I think we have a unique
role to play. If I can use a simple analogy with Formula 1, our
job is that very key end of cutting-edge technology in world class
performance sport and it requires a very focused and intense look
at that, exactly as it does for Formula 1 compared with, perhaps,
the mass car manufacturer.
Q274 Michael Fabricant: Avoiding
any discussion of Bernie Eccleston, I understand what you say,
but UK Sport probably has a world class overhead, in the sense
that you have got an infrastructure. A similar thing, of course,
existed with the British Tourist Authority, and in order to get
rid of their overheads, if you like, they decided to merge in
with—I have forgotten what it is called actually, but anyway
the English Tourist Authority. Why do you not do a similar thing
with Sport England so that you can still represent Britain on
a national scale internationally, you can still do all the things
you have spoken about, including the promotion of world class
excellence in various sports, but at the same time operate, you
know, within the structure of an existing organisation, and, as
I say, minimise your overheads?
Ms Campbell: I think, as you are
probably aware, that is where we came from. We came from a GB
English structure and it was felt not to be working very effectively.
I think my job as the reform chair, as I have been asked to do,
has been to go back to the drawing-board to ask the very questions
that you are asking of me. In the short time I have been there,
having gone into fairly in depth consultations, both the devolved
administrations and the home country sports councils remain absolutely
convinced that the distinctiveness of this organisation requires
a separation of the organisation. That does not mean to say that
our back-room services and our back-room systems cannot at some
point be more effectively and efficiently run together, but the
actual nature of the organisation is distinctive in ethos.
Q275 Michael Fabricant: How large
is your organisation? How many people do you employ?
Ms Campbell: Around 80.
Q276 Michael Fabricant: So it is
quite a significant sum. Then, of course, you mentioned the Olympics,
but that will be operated by a totally separate organisation.
Perhaps you could outline what input you provide into the Olympics
Committee?
Ms Campbell: The 2012 Committee,
are you referring to?
Q277 Michael Fabricant: Not just
the 2012 Committee, but also—
Ms Campbell: The British Olympics
Association?
Q278 Michael Fabricant: Not just
our bid to host the Olympics in 2012—is it 2012? Yes. I
am getting my dates wrong—but also, you know, our role in
actually presenting world class athletes at the next Olympic Games?
Ms Campbell: The British Olympic
Association is the body here that actually manages the teams,
travel and movement to the games and supports the athletes at
the games. We are meeting with them, and have been meeting with
them over the last six months, and are very aware that we need
a very strong partnership arrangement with them. We are moving
to a very close working relationship with them, but it is not
a simple matter of simply just transporting athletes to the games.
What we do is spend the four years running up to those games to
make sure we are working with the governing bodies of sport to
provide the systems; and that is much more than just athletes
who can achieve world class success, that means making sure we
have the coaches, the performance directors who can manage that,
the sports scientists and the sports medical people to support
the athletes at the highest level. So absolutely, again a great
question, we do need a close relationship with the British Olympic
Association, but we do have distinct functions and we do have
distinct roles, and they are complementary, and together I think
we can provide very strongly for what is essentially the UK vision
for sport in this country.
Q279 Chris Bryant: I am sorry to
stick with you, again; I am sure we will come on to some of the
others of you. You suggest that you do not get enough cash, that
sport does not get enough cash, basically, out of the lottery.
You get 16.7%, do you not, or sport does? Who should get less
then? Because it is a share out of a pie, is it not?
Ms Campbell: I feel very passionately
that sport can be and should be an area which can have a major
impact on a whole range of other agendas, whether it is health,
education, or environment. I think in the past we have seen sport
for sport's sake, and I think what we are all arguing inside sport
is that there is a growing awareness, and indeed growing evidence,
that demonstrates that sport can impact on many other wider, equally
important agendas. So we are not seeing an investment in sport
as just an investment in sport, we are seeing investment in sport
as an investment in health, in education, in the environment.
So it is not for me to suggest who should get less, but what I
think we are saying—
|
