Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport Sixth Report


4  Legacy for community sport

118. In our previous Report on the Games, we said that "possibly the greatest prize to emerge from the Games would be a demonstrable increase in participation in sport throughout the community".[222] The Candidature File did not state explicitly that hosting the Games in London would in itself lead to a lasting increase in participation in sport across the UK; but Lord Coe acknowledged that, at Singapore, when final presentations were made to the International Olympic Committee, participation was "very clearly what we talked about".[223] The Candidature File placed stress on the "inspiration" which the Games would provide for youth, stimulating the interest of a new generation of Londoners and leaving a legacy of facilities for sporting activities.[224] Gerry Sutcliffe MP, the DCMS Minister with responsibility for sport, told us that the Games were "going to be a fantastic inspiration to the whole of the country" and that they could, as part of a series of major sporting events in the UK over the next decade, "inspire people at all levels in terms of sports participation".[225]

Prospects for achieving an increase in participation in sport

119. In our previous Report on preparations for the Games, we observed that no host country had yet been able to demonstrate a direct benefit from the Olympic Games in the form of a lasting increase in participation.[226] Since that Report was published, we have not become aware of any new evidence indicating that previous Games have had a lasting benefit. Research commissioned by the London Assembly into the legacy of recent Olympic Games and Paralympic Games found little evidence of lasting increases in participation in sport in previous Host Cities. While there were signs of short-term positive impacts, the evidence from Sydney was described as "ambiguous", and there were signs that reports of positive impacts were largely anecdotal.[227]

120. We note optimism among certain national governing bodies of sports that the Games will attract more people to their sports. British Cycling told us that the Games would "contribute strongly" to present growth in interest, particularly following any success by British athletes in competition. It argued that the Games "could, and should, be the single greatest catalyst in our lifetime to lever a change in the nation's behavioural attitudes towards sport and physical activity".[228] British Swimming spoke of the Games' "once in a lifetime credentials to motivate the population to do more physical activity".[229]

121. Statistics for participation in sport in developed nations suggest that levels of adult participation in England lag some way behind those of other comparable countries. The Review of national sport effort and resources, commissioned by the Government and led by Lord Carter of Coles, presented evidence in 2005 that participation levels in England were lower than those in France, Germany, Japan or the USA and were substantially lower than those in Canada, Australia and Finland.[230] We acknowledge the limitations of statistics compiled using differing methodologies and definitions.

122. More recent data for England show no sign of any significant upturn in adult participation rates. The latest findings from the Taking Part survey, used by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport as a measure for participation in culture, leisure and sport, found that the proportion of adults (including young people aged 16 and above) taking part in "active sport"[231] in the first half of 2007 was 53.4%, down from 53.7% in the first half of 2006. The proportion taking part in "moderate intensity level" sport[232] was 21.5%, up from 20.9% in the first half of 2006.[233]

123. The Government recognises the scale of the challenge in raising participation rates and has set objectives to try to drive the various agencies involved and enable them to bring about an increase. DCMS and Sport England have a target to increase the number of adults participating in sport by two million by 2012.[234] In addition, when Public Service Agreement (PSA) targets were recast in conjunction with the preparation of the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review, a new PSA target was drawn up: to deliver a successful Olympic Games and Paralympic Games with a sustainable legacy. One of the indicators by which progress will be measured will be the number of people across the nations and regions of the UK and in other countries taking part in government-supported programmes associated with the 2012 Games. A further indicator will focus upon participation in sport by children and young people. A detailed measurement methodology for each indicator will be developed in 2008. [235]

Efforts to increase participation

124. Several of those who gave evidence to the inquiry are making efforts within their field to increase participation, sometimes with a clear link to the Games, sometimes not. We describe some of the work being undertaken and the roles of some of the key players below.

What the Government is doing

125. On 13 July 2007, shortly after taking office, the Prime Minister announced that an extra £100 million would be made available to enable all children in England aged between 5 and 16 to have access to up to five hours of sport per week from 2008 until 2011, two hours of which would be in the curriculum, and to enable all young people in England aged between 16 and 19 to have access to three hours of sport per week. The funding will support:

126. Beyond the initial announcement by the Prime Minister, there is very little detail of what the "offer" actually means. The five-hour opportunity is not a minimum level: it is an entitlement. It builds upon an existing ambition, not enshrined within a Public Service Agreement, to offer all children at least four hours of sport per week by 2010 "through a combination of sport provision in the curriculum and out of school and community activities".[237] It is not clear how the offer is to be measured, or whether the mere availability of (for instance) swimming facilities for five hours a week at a local leisure centre would constitute a five-hour "offer".

127. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport listed three other initiatives being undertaken at Government level as part of the effort to increase uptake of sport:

  • The UK School Games, a multi-sport competitive event for talented young people, to be held in a regional city in each year leading until 2011;
  • The Young Ambassadors programme, identifying young people to act as advocates and role models, working to increase participation, "support learning through the Olympic and Paralympic values" and "provide inspiration for other young people to 'choose sport'"; and
  • Continued investment in coaching, improving the quality and quantity of coaches across England.[238]

What Sport England is doing

128. Under the Public Sector Funding Package for the Games drawn up in 2003, Sport England is contributing £295 million in Lottery funding for the Games.[239] Approximately £49 million is money already allocated to the preparation of elite athletes, before the transfer of funding and responsibility to UK Sport; £63 million has been allocated to the development of the Aquatics Centre, the Velodrome, training facilities at Picketts Lock and a multi-sport hub in Portsmouth (which could serve as a training and holding camp facility); and the remaining £183 million is intended for "multi-sport community projects across England".[240] Sport England told us £125 million of the £183 million for community projects had already been drawn down and claimed, and it provided examples of how it was being spent. These included projects to widen access, for instance for people with disabilities, projects to support health and wellbeing initiatives in the workplace, initiatives to link university or college sports clubs with local community clubs, and development of skills and capacity among coaches, volunteers and other officials working in community and leisure services.[241]

129. We asked the Chief Executive of Sport England how projects funded from the £183 million for community sport identified within the Public Sector Funding Package for the Games were linked distinctively to them. She replied that "great community sport is great community sport, Olympics or not" and told us that some projects had a very clear Olympic link; and she maintained that "we have thought quite carefully to try and make sure that the projects do have appropriate connections and are going to contribute to delivering a really good legacy".[242] We do not question the value of the projects themselves, but few actually appear to have a clear link to the 2012 Games. We suggested in our previous Report on preparations for the Games that the inclusion of the £183 million for community sport legacy within the Public Sector Funding Package might in fact be a rebadging exercise for programmes which were going to be sponsored by Sport England in any case. We conclude that our suspicions were correct.[243]

130. Sport England is the publicly funded agency with a defined role in sustaining and increasing adult participation in sport. It was identified by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport as the Lead Delivery Partner for the Olympic Programme's sub-Objective of maximising the increase in UK participation at grassroots level in all sports and across all groups.[244] The Chief Executive of British Swimming believed that Sport England should have a clear responsibility "to use the Olympics to drive forward the enthusiasm of the young people in this country for sport".[245]

131. However, there is little sign that Sport England is setting the pace in using the Games as a means of increasing participation in sport. One reason may be the reassessment of the organisation's role signalled by the Rt Hon. James Purnell MP, the previous Secretary of State at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. In a speech to the Youth Sport Trust Annual Conference in November 2007, he announced a change of direction for Sport England. He argued that there should now be a "clear focus on sport development and sports participation" and implied that other agencies and Government departments should concentrate upon the effort to improve the nation's health by increasing levels of physical activity. Gerry Sutcliffe MP, the DCMS Minister with responsibility for sport, confirmed this message, saying that "programmes which the Government wanted to introduce to help with the health of the nation […] were being missed because it was being left to Sport England to deliver".[246]

132. The shift in focus for Sport England was controversial and led to the resignation of its Chairman, Derek Mapp. The Minister acknowledged that Mr Mapp had "disagreed with the direction of travel that we wanted to go in" but stated clearly that he thought Mr Mapp had been wrong.[247] The Chief Executive of Sport England took a very positive view of the redefinition of Sport England's role and told us that the "clear sense of direction" now being given had given the organisation a "sharpness of focus" which gave it a "very good prospect of being able to deliver".[248]

133. Sport England's memorandum to our inquiry identified a further uncertainty which may account for its apparent lack of energy in leading the drive to establish a legacy for participation in sport. In November 2007, when its memorandum was submitted, Sport England was still awaiting the conclusions of the Comprehensive Spending Review on its funding and priorities for 2008-2011. It told us that once this process had been completed, it would "be able to plan and communicate its specific role in terms of grassroots legacy".[249] The allocations were announced shortly before Sport England gave oral evidence in January 2008. Figures for Exchequer funding and Lottery funding for Sport England in each year from 2005-06 to 2010-11, collated from various sources, are given in the table below:

Table 5: Sport England income from Grant-in-Aid and Lottery sources
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13
Lottery income 183.0132.0 126.4121.8 101.899.6 100.5127.1
Grant-in-Aid 78.6102.5 115.9133.2 130.2128.2 --

Sources: Lottery income for 2005-06 and 2006-07: English Sports Council Annual Report and Accounts 2006-07, HC 818 (Session 2006-07); for 2007-08: oral evidence Q 351; Estimates of Lottery income for later years from HC Deb, 8 Oct 2007, col. 327W. Sources for Grant-in-Aid: 2005-06 and 2006-07: English Sports Council Annual Report and Accounts 2006-07, HC 818 (Session 2006-07); 2007-08 onwards: HC Deb 5 February 2008, col. 1044W. Sport England has other sources of income, so column totals do not generate total income. All figures are for £million.

The Chief Executive of Sport England told us that its Spending Review settlement was equivalent to Sport England's baseline bid to the Government, with the addition of some extra funding to support Sport England's role in providing for the offer of up to five hours per week of sport for children up to the age of 16.[250]

134. As Table 5 above shows, the increases in Grant-in-Aid mirror a significant fall in Lottery income. Business in Sport and Leisure spoke of concerns about the feasibility of delivering a soft sporting legacy around the Games, given the reduction in Lottery funding for grassroots sport due to the transfer of funds out of the National Lottery Distribution Fund.[251] The Central Council for Physical Recreation estimated the amount of Lottery funding to be diverted from sports Lottery distributors as a result of the Games to be £560 million.[252]

What local authorities are doing

135. Local government is the biggest public funder of sport, spending £664 million on revenue costs in 2005-06.[253] If capital costs are included, the level of annual expenditure is approximately £1 billion.[254] The Local Government Association pointed out that leisure and recreation services are not ones which local government is statutorily required to provide to a certain level; consequently, they can be vulnerable when budgets need to be trimmed.[255] The Minister at DCMS with responsibility for sport told us that he was "pleased to see […] that sport is now very much higher on the agenda of local government".[256] We have not explored whether there are good grounds for making this statement, although we note that the new local government performance framework announced in October 2007, while reducing significantly the number of performance indicators, introduced for the first time indicators relating to participation in sport by both young people and adults. We welcome the inclusion of youth participation and adult participation in sport in the new list of local authority performance indicators.

136. The submission from the Local Government Association gave examples of sporting programmes linked to the 2012 Games and run by local authorities, including a programme of mass participation events run by Sheffield City Council, a scheme run by Stevenage Borough Council offering grants to young athletes with the potential to compete in the Games, and efforts by Suffolk County Council to enable disabled people to try out Paralympic sports.[257]

137. Lord Coe stressed that the role of local authorities was important and should not be overlooked.[258] In addition to their very visible role as owners of land used for sport and as providers of leisure facilities, local authorities are in a position to convene and support cross-sector partnerships and to identify ways in which participation in sport can be integrated into efforts to improve community cohesion or address anti-social behaviour.[259] Local authorities will often be adept at extracting benefits for sporting participation from funding streams designed for different primary purposes. The Mayor of the London Borough of Waltham Forest, for example, described how the Borough had obtained new community sporting facilities through Government-funded programmes such as Building Schools for the Future. The Mayor of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets gave examples of initiatives financed partly from preventative health budgets of local primary care trusts.[260]

138. Clearly it is not for the Committee to second guess the Boroughs about local circumstances or priorities. An issue raised in questioning, however, was the number of schools in the Boroughs—in common with other inner city areas—which do not possess a soft playable surface. It was suggested that providing all such schools with, at the very least, a rubber- or polymerised soft surface over playground tarmac would provide an immediate, meaningful legacy for the Games which would help participation in sport.[261] We recommended in our previous Report that DCMS, the then Department for Education and Skills, LOCOG and sponsors should work to address the lack of sports facilities open to schoolchildren, in particular, on whose doorstep the Olympics will be held.[262] We recommend again that the Host Boroughs, together with DCMS, the Department for Children, Schools and Families and Sport England, look at straightforward ideas such as the installation of rubber or polymerised soft surfaces over tarmac in school playgrounds, to make the Olympics immediately relevant to schoolchildren in inner city East London, at least. Olympic sponsors, indeed, may also have relevant expertise and interest in getting involved.

What others are doing

139. The LDA sees its responsibilities as including work in partnership with others to "secure the sporting benefits arising from the Games".[263] It listed several programmes in which it had invested and which were designed to increase opportunities for participation in sport in London, including "Summer of Sport", which offered the chance to try out different sports at no charge, and other initiatives to enable greater diversity among sports officials and support for training disabled people to become sports coaches.[264]

140. Evidence from Greenwich Leisure Limited, an operator of over 60 leisure centres in the London area, provided the inquiry with a view from a provider of leisure services for local authority clients. It described outreach events which it either managed or co-ordinated, including a scheme offering free swimming to young people during school holidays, mass participation events raising awareness of the 2012 Games, and an open weekend for all primary schools in Hackney, giving each participating child the chance to try out different sports and activities.[265]

141. LOCOG has played a role as a catalyst. Lord Coe described it as "having provided the inspiration and […] the opportunity"; and he looked to other agencies to pick up LOCOG's lead.[266] LOCOG has also established the Nations and Regions Group to develop national and regional plans for maximising benefits and building a sustainable legacy. Sports participation was identified as a strategic priority for the nations and regions in those plans.[267] We note also the compilation by LOCOG of a Pre-Games Training Camp Guide, offering training facilities to National Olympic Committees and National Paralympic Committees in the months leading up to the Games.[268] While the benefits to local communities of sites being selected for training will be largely economic, there may also be an inspirational value.

142. LOCOG, together with the British Olympic Association, is also well placed to identify how to make maximum use of the commitment shown by top Olympic and Paralympic sportsmen and sportswomen in motivating people to take part in sport. Several witnesses strongly praised the contribution made by Dame Kelly Holmes, Sir Steve Redgrave, Dame Tanni Grey-Thompson and other Olympians and Paralympians who had toured the country promoting sport, adding profile to local sporting events and promoting the image of sport to schoolchildren. The Chair of UK Sport described Dame Kelly Holmes as "an outstanding role model" who was "interested in making a difference";[269] and UK Athletics said that she had gone "up and down the country meeting phenomenal numbers of schoolchildren every year".[270]

Co-ordination: a strategy for participation

143. We recommended in our previous Report on preparations for the Games that the Department for Culture, Media and Sport should publish a joint plan "as soon as possible" on implementation of Sub-objective 4.4 of the Programme Objectives for the Games, namely to achieve the maximum increase in UK participation at community and grass-roots level in all sport and across all groups. We also recommended that the Department should work with the then Department for Education and Skills and with LOCOG and sponsors to address the lack of sports facilities open to schoolchildren, particularly in the areas of London in which the Games will be held.[271]

144. We are disappointed that, fifteen months after publication of our initial Report on preparations for the Games, no comprehensive plan for maximising participation in sport has been published. A draft strategy was drawn up and was subject to consultation; but the Central Council for Physical Recreation told us that it was "simply a repackaging of existing Sport England commitments, within existing spending plans" and that it was in any case withdrawn.[272]

145. The Minister for the Olympics and London announced five "legacy promises" in June 2007, one of which was "[to inspire] a new generation of young people to take part in volunteering, cultural and physical activity".[273] The Government is now preparing a Legacy Action Plan, which will set out how each of the promises will be delivered. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport told us that the Plan would provide detail on some of the major programmes which Sport England would deliver in order to meet the ambition of increased participation in community sport.[274] We note that the Mayor of London included as one of his five London 2012 legacy commitments an undertaking to increase opportunities for Londoners to become involved in sport.[275]

146. Various other plans are being developed. According to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, there is to be a five-year Plan for Community Sport, to be published by Sport England, describing how Sport England will deliver sport to 2013, along with key partners, and how it will seek to boost volunteer activity in community sport.[276] Sport England made no mention of this Plan in either written or oral evidence. The London Development Agency, on behalf of the Mayor of London, is commissioning a Sports Legacy Plan for London "to bring together the collective efforts of the GLA/LDA, Sport England, Youth Sport Trust, UK Sport, London Councils, the Pro-Active partnerships and other key delivery agents".[277] We also note the understanding by the Central Council for Physical Recreation, expressed in its memorandum submitted in November 2007, that a sports legacy strategy would be released on 11 December 2007.[278] Nothing of that description has appeared.

147. There appears to be no shortage of activity in developing plans for participation. In fact, the profusion of commitments, promises and plans for using the potential of the Games to increase participation in sport being developed, whether real or rumoured, is bewildering; but none of what is proposed amounts to a single, comprehensive, nationwide strategy. Mr Sparkes, Chief Executive of British Swimming, spoke of his personal concern that no-one appeared to have "actually picked up the legacy ball for sport" or begun to knit together the efforts of the various governing bodies to provide a sport-wide strategy for maximising participation in the light of the 2012 Games.[279] Likewise, Business in Sport and Leisure was not convinced that a firm strategy or direction had been set by the Government.[280] We share those concerns. We have yet to see what is in the Legacy Action Plan; but it will need to do more than describe Sport England programmes if it is to provide a strategy for using the opportunity of the Games to build participation. Whatever strategy document is produced, it will need to define the roles of each of the many partners involved, including local authorities, Government departments and their agencies, Regional Development Agencies, Sport England, operators of leisure facilities, and individuals. It will also need to set expectations and suggest ways of meeting them.

148. Our view is that, ultimately, any lasting success in increasing participation is likely to be achieved not just through a burst of interest in sport in the lead-up to and during the Games in 2012, but through a change in behaviours and lifestyles. We are under no illusions about the difficulty of bringing about such changes. Nor is Sport England, which recognises that a sustained effort will be needed and that a strong infrastructure will first need to be in place. The Chief Executive of Sport England cited Canada as perhaps the best example of a country where an increase in participation had been achieved (from 21% to 41%), albeit over a 20-year period. She said that the increase in participation in Canada had been achieved by "a sustained campaign combining investment in the opportunity, in facilities and their club structure together with constant stimulation of demand for sport, [through] PR, reminding people about sport, reminding people about the value of sport".[281]

149. The Chief Executive of Sport England also told us that "the Olympics are an opportunity and not a guarantee" and that:

"[…] what the Olympics adds is an element of momentum, it is an element of heightened aspirations and particularly for community sport, which depends so crucially on partnerships, it is a very good way of persuading people to make decisions simultaneously […]What the Olympics can do if we use it intelligently is to provide a focus where people will say, "If we're not going to do it now then there's never going to be a right time to do it so let's close out the decision."[282]

She pointed out that there would "be a profile for sport over the period between now and 2012 which it is unlikely to have in normal times"; while not enough on its own to make a lasting impact upon participation levels, she maintained that the profile in itself presented an opportunity.[283]

150. We agree with Sport England's assessment of how the 2012 Games might help to increase participation in sport at grassroots and community level. Increasing participation in sport cannot be a quick fix. Spin-offs from the 2012 Games alone cannot bring about the fundamental change in behavioural patterns needed. The Games can, however, provide an opportunity to promote the image of health through sport and can generate a higher level of commitment of public sector funding and private sector sponsorship for sporting events and facilities. The Games will also provide a window during which the public is more receptive to efforts by Government and local authorities to increase participation.


222   Second Report of Session 2006-07, HC 69-I, paragraph 112 Back

223   Q 90 Back

224   Candidature File, Volume 1, page 11 Back

225   Q 390 Back

226   Second Report from the Committee, Session 2006-07, HC 69-I, paragraph 113 Back

227   A Lasting Legacy for London?: Report by the London Assembly, May 2007; research by the London East Research Institute at the University of East London Back

228   Ev 1 Back

229   Ev 5 Back

230   Review of national sport effort and resources, April 2005, page 14  Back

231   Defined as "at least one occasion of participation in an active sport during the past four weeks". The list of "active sports" includes activities which do not necessarily raise a person's breathing rate (such as snooker, fishing and yoga). See "Taking part", Office for National Statistics statistical release, 13 December 2007 Back

232   Defined as participation in moderate intensity level sport for at least 30 minutes on at least three separate days during the past week. "Moderate intensity level" sports include most of those on the list of "active sports" but exclude those which do not raise a person's breathing rate. See "Taking part", Office for National Statistics statistical release, 13 December 2007 Back

233   National Statistics statistical release 13 December 2007 Back

234   Q 383 Back

235   The two outline measures will be the percentage of 5-16-year-olds participating in at least two hours per week of high quality PE and sport at school and the percentage of 5-19-year-olds participating in at least three further hours per week of sporting opportunities. See London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games Annual Report January 2008, page 17  Back

236   Ev 124; also Department for Children, Schools and Families Press Release, 13 July 2007 Back

237   See Department for Children, Schools and Families Press Release, 13 July 2007 Back

238   Ev 124-5 Back

239   Sport England's latest estimate of its total contribution is £364 million, including £100 million being diverted from its share of good causes, the £183 million for community sport already identified, the £63 million already identified for named sporting facilities, and £17.5 million "to fund Olympic success", as opposed to the £49 million for elite sport cited in evidence to our previous inquiry. See Ev 115. Back

240   Ev 115. See also evidence to the Committee's previous inquiry, HC 69-II, Session 2006-07, Ev 110-1 Back

241   Ev 116 Back

242   Q 375 and 376 Back

243   HC 69-I, Session 2006-07, paragraph 76 Back

244   Written submission to the Committee's previous inquiry into preparations for the Games, HC 69-II, Session 2006-07, Ev 112 Back

245   Q 41 Back

246   Q 386 Back

247   Q 404 Back

248   Q 339 Back

249   Ev 108 Back

250   Q 356 Back

251   Ev 149 Back

252   The CCPR set out briefly the metholodogy used in reaching this figure: see Ev 150 Back

253   Local Government Financial Statistics (England), no. 17 (2007), Table C1  Back

254   Ev 172 Back

255   Ev 172 Back

256   Q 386 Back

257   Ev 173 Back

258   Q 90 Back

259   See LGA memorandum, Ev 172 Back

260   Q 332 Back

261   Q 331-2 Back

262   Second Report from the Committee, Session 2006-07, HC 69-I, paragraph 113 Back

263   Ev 77 Back

264   Ev 78 Back

265   Ev 94-5 Back

266   Q 90 Back

267   Memorandum from DCMS to Committee's previous inquiry into preparations for the Games, HC 69-II, Session 2006-07, Ev 57 Back

268   London 2012 Press Release 3 March 2008 Back

269   Q 79 Back

270   Q 26 Back

271   Second Report from the Committee, Session 2006-07, HC 69-I, paragraph 113 Back

272   Ev 150 Back

273   London 2012 press release 12 June 2007 Back

274   Ev 125 Back

275   Greater London Assembly press release, 9 January 2008 Back

276   Ev 125 Back

277   Ev 78 Back

278   Ev 150 Back

279   Q 40  Back

280   Ev 149 Back

281   Q 360 Back

282   Q 371 Back

283   Q 372 Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2008
Prepared 30 April 2008