Olympic and Paralympic Games 2012: Legacy - Culture, Media and Sport Committee Contents

Written evidence submitted by CCPR


  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.

Whether the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games will deliver a lasting legacy of social, physical and economic regeneration

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.

Ways of maximising the value of the Olympic legacy both within the host boroughs, London and across the UK

  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.


      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

previous page contents next page

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

© Parliamentary copyright 2010
Prepared 12 April 2010