Examination of Witnesses (Questions 80-87)
MR CRAIG
REEDIE CBE, MS
SUE CAMPBELL
CBE, MR DAVID
MOORCROFT AND
DAME TANNI
GREY-THOMPSON
18 OCTOBER 2005
Q80 Adam Price: You mentioned inclusion
in the mainstream. What are sports governing bodies doing to make
coaching courses accessible and inclusive for athletes with a
disability?
Dame Tanni Grey-Thompson: That
has moved on an awful lot over the last few years. The picture
across different sports is very different. In some sports it is
technically easier to include disabled athletes. In a sport like
swimming it is easier to include athletes with disabilities in
terms of the way they train in the pool. A lot of governing bodies
are now working very hard to make sure that the whole range of
services that they offer, not just because of the DDA but because
they want to be part of it, are completely inclusive. When you
look at athletics, they are working on inclusive coaching programmes.
In terms of the officials, there are quite a lot of disabled officials
which is probably one of the easiest things to do. It is partly
trying to attract disabled people to become coaches but also making
sure the coaches who are currently working at a high level understand
some of the different needs of disabled athletes. It is very positive
to see that the governing bodies are taking that on and moving
it forward because I think that is part of the key to success.
The most important thing is you have someone who is a very well
qualified coach and then the physiological adaptation is very
minor. When you are talking about elite level athletes, what we
have had in the past is a coach who is maybe not very qualified
but is the mother or father or in some way related to a disabled
athlete and that is how they get involved in coaching. What we
have seen since Atlanta is that does not work. That is the most
important thing if we are trying to develop Paralympics, getting
highly qualified coaches. Some of the changes that are going on
in terms of athletics in terms of inclusion are really positive
and it is good to see them happening. I think a lot of sports
have taken them on.
Mr Moorcroft: Historically, athletics
has not been the most inclusive of sports. There are not too many
clubs in athletics where they make people feel comfortable or
have the facilities to offer for children with disabilities, but
that is changing. As Tanni said, through coaching education we
have specific modules for athletes with disability. There is an
award scheme that we have that has adaptations at every level
for athletes with disabilities, as with the new school curriculum
programme. One of the crucial things, I think, is looking for
the similarities. As a distance athlete, Tanni is an endurance
athlete and has the same physical needs, aerobic, anaerobic, as
a Kelly Holmes or a Paula Radcliffe, so there is a correlation
there. We have athletes who are amputees or who are visually impaired
who are runners and they have exactly the same coaching needs
with minor adaptations to those who are able bodied. As much as
possible, and Tanni and some other colleagues are helping, it
is helping able bodied athletes out probably as much, in fact,
more than the other way round. Part of the challenge of 2012 from
an organisational point of view is to create a seamless Olympics/Paralympics
all within sport and all of the Olympic sports are trying to do
the same thing.
Dame Tanni Grey-Thompson: I think
it is partly about using 2012 to break down the barriers that
are associated with disability. There has been a big sea change
in various generations. People of my parents' generation had a
very different view of disability than some of the youngsters
who watched Paralympic coverage in Athens. For me, the Paralympics
almost has two messages. One is about a link with sport and someone
winning and everyone else not winning, but it is also about promoting
inclusion and changing young people's attitudes. I think one of
the great advantages with the time slots that the Paralympics
were shown on TV was you got into that generation of young people,
kids who were coming home from school watching disabled people
competing and had a different view of disability so they are not
going to grow up dragging their kids away from someone with a
disability because they might catch something, they just grow
up seeing disability as something that is naturally part of society.
It is about using 2012 in that way and the development of athletes
to make society more inclusive so you have a group of young disabled
people growing up also believing that they do have a right to
education, they have a right to higher education, a right to work,
a right to contribute, not just that they will be there on benefits,
which is how a lot of people of my generation grew up because
that was how they were treated.
Q81 Chairman: Are there any governing
bodies that you think could be doing more than they are?
Dame Tanni Grey-Thompson: Probably
every governing body could be doing more, but in different ways.
I think the pattern amongst governing bodies is very difficult.
It is difficult between the Olympic and Paralympic split because
for many governing bodies the Olympics will naturally have a little
bit more priority and within the Paralympics side it is accepting
that but making sure that we ensure the services that are delivered
are of a high standard. Sometimes there is a difference between
being equal and being equitable. There is no reason why the level
of service cannot be as high, even though in my lifetime an Olympic
medal will always be seen as something that has higher value than
a Paralympic medal.
Q82 Mr Hall: Tanni, you mentioned
the broadcast coverage of the Athens Paralympics but are you happy
about the arrangements for the Paralympics in 2012 and the broadcast
coverage that we will see there? There were some really fantastic
events at Athens that did not get any broadcast coverage at all
in the Paralympics.
Dame Tanni Grey-Thompson: It is
difficult because if you look back to Seoul we had a half an hour
programme a few weeks after the Games, which mostly featured some
Irish bocce players rather than any British athletes at all. Barcelona
was a big sea change in terms of the coverage but it was only
through Sydney that there was daily coverage and I think that
will improve and Beijing will be another step on. I am not sure
we are ever going to get the same number of hours on TV as the
Olympics but I think we can do better. What a lot of the media
in this country have done, certainly between Sydney and today,
is looked at covering more events in between Games, so you would
only ever really see Paralympics on TV and not much for another
four years but certainly the BBC and the print media are very
good at increasing that amount of coverage and it has to be drip
fed through each of the years to inspire the next generation of
young people. I think the coverage will improve and by 2012 it
will be fantastic.
Q83 Mr Hall: Can I ask you a completely
different question. For athletes who have got disabilities technology
is very important. Are we doing enough in the technology field
to make sure that our Paralympic athletes have got the very best
equipment for when we get to 2012?
Dame Tanni Grey-Thompson: I think
so. Certainly athletes who are Lottery funded get access to the
equipment that they need, and that is funded and supported through
the coaching structure, so it is not just an athlete saying, "I
fancy that because it looks nice", they have to justify the
reason why they need it. Our co-ordination of development of technology
has got a lot better in the last couple of years, so instead of
seeing other countries as the place to go and buy technology we
are spending more time developing it here. That is very positive.
Certainly in terms of racing chair technology we are doing a lot
more in the UK to make sure we can really push the boundaries
and push the rules as far as they are allowed. One of the advantages
we have is we have some money to actually buy decent equipment
and I think where we are going to see big changes is in some of
the African countries and China who did not have access to that
equipment who will come through and be able to develop things.
That is a challenge for us.
Ms Campbell: It is a challenge
for both the Paralympics and Olympics. In certain sports, the
rowing, the cycling and the sailing, that technological edge is
really critical. We are now putting quite a lot of money into
working with one of the research councils to look at real innovation
in technology, in clothing, in equipment, and particularly looking
at those things that will give us those winning margins that are
now so tiny, just so small.
Q84 Mr Hall: The eights in the rowing.
Ms Campbell: Absolutely, it is
that whole technological area. I think that is one of the really
exciting things where sport and business can work together effectively.
Mr Reedie: Chairman, for the purposes
of clarity, the host broadcaster for the Olympic Games in 2012
will almost certainly be a company called Olympic Broadcasting
Services which is owned and run by the IOC. The Paralympic Games
will need their own host broadcaster, and I am absolutely convinced
that the BBC will provide those host broadcaster services. Maybe
you could seek confirmation of that at some future date.
Chairman: We will make a point of doing
so.
Q85 Paul Farrelly: In 2012 after
we have topped the Paralympics table and seen off Germany, France
and Italy, what will happen to all of these wonderful facilities
that we have built and the great complex in the Lea Valley? Should
they remain in public ownership? David, I think your organisation
has floated the idea of an Olympic Trust.
Mr Moorcroft: The sooner the issue
of what entity will manage those facilities is resolved the better.
We have already begun discussions with LOCOG in terms of the athletics
facilities both for the Games and beyond the Games. When you talk
about Olympic Institutes and you know the passion that Seb and
others have, I believe it should be held in trust and you will
get the best of both worlds in terms of the quality of facilities
available for the Games but also the community and elite legacy
that is left beyond the Games. Our hope and belief is that a lot
of lessons will be learned from the Sydney experience and the
Athens experience and a trust will be created post-2012 and those
facilities will live for many years beyond it.
Q86 Paul Farrelly: A very early lead
is going to be taken on this, is it not, because we are setting
up the Olympic Delivery Authority and there is talk already of
the sorts of Private Finance Initiative contracts that might be
signed. These are long and complicated contracts. We have got
to take a decision pretty quickly and take a view on how we want
to see things develop after 2012.
Mr Reedie: As far as the legacy
use of the funding after the Games is concerned, each of the facilities
that will stay in the Olympic Park has a 25 year business plan
already negotiated and agreed. If they require a subsidy, can
I suggest when Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, comes to
see you, you address your comments to him there. Can I also stress
from the previous evidence you took from Seb and Keith that as
you go through this exercise you bear in mind that there are two
very distinct budgets involved here. One is the Organising Committee
budget, and that is the bit that Seb and Keith have to look after,
and the second is the construction budget, the infrastructure,
the stadiums and all the rest of it. In fact, on the running costs
of the Montreal Games they made a profit but what did not make
a profit were the cost over-runs on facilities and the way they
accounted for them in Canada at the time, which is why there has
been a long pay-off period. I do urge you to keep that absolutely
at the back of your mind as you question the Organising Committee
over the next few years.
Ms Campbell: Equally, it would
be good to remind all of us on a regular basis of the other legacy,
which is the legacy for people in sport. It would be very easy
to focus on the legacy of the facilities, and that is absolutely
right and proper, but we must keep being reminded in sport that
this must be much more than a fantastic show in town. This has
got to be a transformation of the way sport operates in this country
and a chance for us to change for both Olympians and Paralympians,
young people, whatever their background and ability, a chance
to take part in sport and reach the highest level they want to
reach. We have got a big job to do and I think you need to keep
asking what is the legacy for people beyond the Olympics, not
just the facilities. You need to keep making us address that issue.
Q87 Paul Farrelly: I think we should
be asking that right now. The playing fields I knocked around
on as a kid are now housing estates. There are London boroughs
bordering on the Lea Valley, such as Hackney, where kids barely
see a blade of glass to play on. Should we be marking the award
of the Olympics with an Olympic moratorium on the sale of any
more playing fields, for starters?
Ms Campbell: I am not going to
go into the playing field debate here, you have had more Select
Committees on that than I have ever attended. What I can say to
you is the investment in school sports that is now happening is
making a difference and that is being researched independently.
We are seeing significant increases in both primary and secondary
age youngsters playing sport both within the curriculum and outside
school. Dave was right, the next big thing is we have to connect
those effectively into club sport, we have to provide the coaching
that allows those kids to progress and then we have to marry it
into that elite system so we have got a systemic way of any youngster,
no matter where they start from, finding the ladder to success
and not groping in the dark for it, which to a large extent is
how most of our elite athletes have found their way in many sports.
Mr Moorcroft: When I was competing
in the 1970s we were fairly embarrassed about the quality of facilities
at all levels in the UK. One of the great pluses of Lottery funding,
rightly or wrongly, the decision to invest mainly in capital in
the first few years, was the huge increase in the quality of indoor
facilities across the UK—putting the playing field debate
to one side. That creates a really good platform. As Sue said,
there is the physical legacy of London that is crucial but there
is also a physical and people's legacy around the UK that is of
equal significance. Again, one of our collective challenges is
to make sure there is the right balance there.
Chairman: If there are no more questions,
since we have kept our friends from tourism waiting, can I thank
you very much indeed for your time this morning.
| 
