1. CCPR is the national alliance of governing
and representative bodies of sport and recreation. Our 305 members
represent 150,000 clubs across the UK and some eight million regular
participants. CCPR exists to promote the role of sport and recreation
in healthy and active lifestyles, to encourage a policy and regulatory
environment in which sport from grassroots through to elite level
can flourish, and to provide high quality services to help its
members to continually improve and progress.
2. CCPR represents the full scope of sport and recreation—from
football to folk dance, from rambling to rounders—and is
interested in the welfare of both Olympic and non-Olympic sports.
To CCPR and its members, the hosting of the Olympic and Paralympic
Games in London in 2012 represents first and foremost a tremendous
opportunity to inspire and sustain a step-change in participation
in sport and recreation throughout the UK. Indeed, this was a
fundamental part of London's successful bid. CCPR therefore welcomes
the Inquiry and is pleased to present below its views on issues
raised by the Committee. CCPR would also welcome the opportunity
to present oral evidence to the Committee.
3. There are many stakeholders in the London 2012
Games, and each group is likely to have a particular outcome in
mind with regard to legacy. For those living in the East End,
the most pressing legacy need may be around physical and economic
regeneration, whilst for CCPR the most pressing need is to deliver
an increase in grass-roots sporting participation.
4. Some elements of legacy are more immediately apparent
than others. For instance, it is already clear from the advanced
construction work in the Olympic Park that there will be a physical
legacy from the Games within the host boroughs. However, for this
physical legacy to be "lasting" it must be closely tied
to the social and economic elements of legacy.
5. The park can itself play a key role in delivering
this social and economic legacy if the remaining venues and park
lands are managed such that the park becomes a vibrant site offering
employment to local residents and ongoing opportunities for sport
and recreation. Conversely, if the park fails to become economically
viable following the games, then it is clear that the physical
legacy will not be "lasting", and that the social and
economic legacy will not be realised.
6. CCPR is aware that the Olympic Park Legacy
Company is considering all possible means of ensuring a vibrant
and viable park following the games, and CCPR is ensuring that
its own members are fully consulted with regard to these future
plans. This issue is addressed more fully below.
7. As outlined above, CCPR's primary concern
is to achieve a lasting legacy of increased sporting participation.
The responsibility to deliver this legacy rests with the Government
as agreed by the Olympic Board:
Objective 4.4: HMG—maximise increase
in UK participation at community and grass-roots level in all
sport and across all groups.
8. CCPR has been vocal about the need for Government
to make plans and invest appropriately to deliver such a legacy.
The publication of the Government's Legacy Action Plan set out
these plans and their accompanying investment. Whilst CCPR welcomes
this plan, it still remains unclear of the extent to which these
programmes and the associated investment are directly related
to the Games, and the extent to which these would have occurred
in the course of the Government's usual sports policy.
9. To remedy this, CCPR believes that there
should be a clear and defined "Olympic Legacy" investment
stream, which would in the first instance fund a series of pilot
projects in specific localities designed to:
— stimulate and inspire interest in sport
and recreation as a result of the 2012 Games;
— remove barriers to participation; and
— monitor increases in participation.
10. The success of these "pathfinders",
which might include both capital projects such as walkways or
outdoor table tennis, and revenue programmes such as come and
try it days or coach training schemes, should then be assessed
in order to create a series of "models" which can be
implemented nationwide. Funding should then be made available
to local authorities to devise participation strategies and commission
delivery programmes that are relevant to their locality.
11. CCPR's ambition is for the Olympics to be
just as significant for local communities as the millennium and
the work of the Millennium Commission. As part of this scheme,
villages and towns all over the country benefitted from specific
millennium funding streams for capital and revenue funding which
left a lasting and tangible benefit for those concerned. In much
the same way, CCPR would welcome Olympic cycle-ways built as part
of every major new road system, Olympic basketball hoops constructed
in every leisure facility etc. Fields in Trust (formerly the National
Playing Fields Association) expresses a similar vision through
its "2012 fields" campaign. Securing the future of 2012
playing fields as a result of the games would be a clear, tangible
and long lasting legacy from the games.
The use and management of the Olympic Park and
venues after 2012
12. The Post-Games management of the Olympic
Park will fall to the long-established Lee Valley Regional Park
Authority (LVRPA) and the recently formed Olympic Park Legacy
Company (OPLC). The LVRPA already manages a significant part of
the Olympic Park, making this available for sport and recreation
usage. As a result CCPR believes it is well placed to manage those
venues that will fall within its ambit, which include the whitewater
centre, tennis centre and velo-park. It is important to note that
whilst LVRPA charges appropriately for use of its facilities,
it also benefits from core funding from a levy on those local
authorities within which the park falls. For the year 2009-10
this stands at £12,233,800.
13. The remainder of the park will be managed by
the Olympic Park Legacy Company. The company is currently in the
process of recruiting the staff it will need to manage the park
in legacy mode, and has begun discussions with potential future
tenants of the park and possible management contractors. CCPR
has assisted this process by surveying its members to identify
those which might wish to relocate to the Olympic Park post-Games.
If the park is able to provide affordable and fit for purpose
accommodation for sporting bodies this would be a key contribution
to sporting legacy, and help to retain a sporting ethos within
the park post-games.
14. More important than the use of generic office
buildings is the use of the games-time venues and park open-space
post games. CCPR is aware that OPLC wishes to ensure that the
park remains a key venue for those wishing to participate in sport
and recreation beyond the games, and CCPR fully supports this
aim. It is crucial that discussions with future venue operators
are concluded as early as possible so that their input with regard
to viable legacy usage is gained, and a swift post-games transformation
secured. The biggest challenge in this respect is the main Olympic
stadium. It is clear that a key tenant is needed in order to make
this venue financially viable, and all options must be considered.
15. As noted above the LVRPA benefits from a
levy in order to manage and maintain its land and venues. CCPR
believes that the OPLC will similarly require a degree of public
subsidy in order to operate its site effectively.
Progress towards meeting targets to increase grassroots
participation in sport
16. Sport England is the non-departmental pubic
body charged with implementing the government's strategy to increase
participation in grass-roots sport. Sport England invests in 46
sports and a range of other strategic partners in order to achieve
its targets. It measures progress via the annual active people
survey.
17. The results from this survey show an unsurprisingly
mixed picture. Overall the number of adults (aged 16 and over)
participating in sport at least three times a week for 30 minutes
has increased by 635,000 from 6.295 million in 2005-06 to 6.93
million in 2008-09.
18. The greatest increase in participation has
been seen amongst men, whilst participation amongst women and
those with a disability has actually decreased. This shows that
the challenge is not just to raise levels of participation, but
particularly to increase participation amongst those less likely
to participate.
19. Sport England and the national governing
bodies of sport and other partners through which it works are
undertaking a range of development programmes to increase participation
in these under-represented groups, but the work required to overcome
the barriers faced by some individuals must not be under-estimated.
The aim of leaving a lasting legacy that improves
cultural life
20. CCPR supports the aim of improving cultural
life via the games, and believes that significant progress has
been made in this area. Plans for the cultural Olympiad are progressing,
with regional cultural programmers in place, and the Inspire Programme
enabling local communities to become part of the Olympiad. However
it is important to note that no funding is available for these
projects, and that the use of the "inspire mark" precludes
organisations from securing commercial funding, due to the rights
of the main Olympic sponsors.
21. As a further support to cultural projects Legacy
Trust UK (the grant making body established to invest in legacy
projects) has developed the "somewhere to" programme
with £5 million to support young people to access space for
creative and sporting activities.
22. As outlined above CCPR believes that specific
legacy programmes should be in place for grass-roots sport, with
appropriate funding to realise these.
How success in delivering lasting legacy can be
measured
23. The means of measuring legacy will necessarily
vary according to the element of legacy in question. The Active
people survey provides a clear management tool for the desired
legacy of increased sporting participation. Should a national
sporting legacy programme be initiated as outlined above, the
Active People survey would be able to measure the impact of projects
in terms of increased participation.
24. With regard to the regeneration and social legacy
CCPR believes that existing national and local indices of employment
and educational attainment would be appropriate measures.
CONCLUSION
25. CCPR welcomes the Committee's inquiry into
the legacy of the 2012 Games, and believes that progress is now
being made towards delivering a legacy of increased sporting participation
at national and local level. Nonetheless CCPR still feels strongly
that this work is not clearly identified with the 2012 project,
and that greater impetus and impact would be generated through
enabling local communities to secure funding to support local
sporting legacy projects, including both small-scale capital build
and people based development projects. CCPR would welcome the
opportunity to discuss this further with the Committee.
January 2010
