Written evidence submitted by the Public
and Commercial Services Union
INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
1. The Public and Commercial Services Union
(PCS) is the largest civil service trade union representing over
300,000 members working in most government departments, non-departmental
public bodies, agencies and privatised areas.
2. PCS represents over 5,000 members employed
in the culture, media and sport sector across the nation, working
in National Museums and Galleries such as the British Museum and
V&A, The National Museums of Liverpool, National Museum of
Science and Industry, National Museums and Galleries of Scotland,
National Museum of Wales, the British Library, English Heritage,
Historic Royal Palaces, Visit Britain, agencies such as the Royal
Parks and the sports councils; Sport England, Sport Scotland and
Sports Council Wales. Therefore, we are in a unique position to
submit evidence as part of this inquiry as our members encourage
and develop participation in sports and cultural life across the
country every day.
3. We welcome the committee's inquiry as an opportunity
to share our anxieties about the lasting legacy of the Olympics.
We are concerned that the original vision of the London 2012 bid
to provide a sustainable and inclusive games is slipping away,
as demonstrated by allocating funding to elitist sports such as
rowing and sailing whilst a sport that would encourage more mass
participation, like table tennis, is left on the sidelines.
4. We would very much support a return to
the original bid, which would see a local legacy being left for
the entire nation, including; Olympic standard training camps
provided across the UK, the use of Olympic sites as key for the
public and also retaining the management of these sites within
the public sector so there is long-term mass accessibility and
participation, which is not governed by economic imperatives.
The current financial situation, for example, resulted in the
disappearance of private sector funding for the media centre and
Olympic village in early 2009.
5. This submission therefore covers our
concerns about:
— progress towards meeting targets to increase
grass roots participation in sport;
— the aim of leaving a lasting legacy that
improves cultural life; and
— how success in delivering a lasting legacy
can be measured.
Progress towards meeting targets to increase grass
roots participation in sport
6. The top slicing of budgets across the
sports and culture sector to pay for the Olympics has been and
is of major concern to us. An example of this is Sport England,
where, despite the Chair's protests to James Purnell (then Secretary
of State at DCMS) the budget was cut and it resulted in inevitable
cancelled projects and impacted on the organisation's targets
to raise the numbers participating in sports in the south east.
7. PCS would strongly recommend that organisations
have time to embed their strategies and demonstrate they can meet
targets rather than, as in Sport England's case, having to review
and revisit its strategies and goals as the organisation moved
from being a national body to becoming a regional and then back
to being a national body over a short period of time. The moving
of their goal posts has only resulted in an organisation having
to become inward looking as it reorganises, rather than fulfilling
its purpose and realising its objectives.
8. We also believe that the existing work
organisations are undertaking should be reviewed and supported,
rather than simply directing them to embrace every new fad, for
instance in the example cited above it is evident that the government
has been confused about its policy regarding sport. We believe
the changes to Sport England's focus question whether there is
a comprehensive and coherent government vision for sport, or whether
the principle objective is to gain as many medals as possible,
with no comprehensive strategy in place on harvesting more long
term benefits towards mass access to sports, improving health
and well being and enhancing communities.
9. Most of the contribution to grass root
participation in sport comes from public funds, including the
revenue and lottery, although we believe the latter has been eroded
regarding the community in recent years and therefore constitutes
just another form of taxation, impacting more on the lower paid
as they pay the subs but do not share the benefits. We believe
that there is merit in encouraging the involvement of other governing
bodies in sport, such as the Football Association and that the
government should place requirements on them to make a greater
contribution, considering the millions at their disposal.
10. We are not satisfied that there is a
coherent strategy in place, co-ordinated by government, where
all stakeholders with a vested interest are working in a joined
up way towards achieving grass root participation. By stakeholders
we mean the health sector, local councils, the Sports Councils,
UK Sport and relevant community groups and clubs.
The aim of leaving a lasting legacy that improves
cultural life
11. PCS believes that the phrase legacy
should not purely mean the situation post 2012 but should also
focus on increasing participation and activity nationwide in anticipation
of the games in 2012.
12. We think there are questions that need answering
about:
— Who is ultimately responsible for determining
what the lasting legacy of the games is?
— What is the extent of planning that has
gone into a coherent and comprehensive approach?
— What organisations have fed into the
development of this approach?
13. Our perception is that there is no ownership
of the legacy and a worrying vagueness around it. We are aware
that across the culture sector a number of organisations are piggybacking
onto the Olympics and there has been much talk of a cultural Olympiad.
However, as far as we can ascertain there has been no central
call from the government to all the organisations that have a
part to play and an interest in contributing ideas, opinions and
developing a strategy. We are also aware that previous Olympics
have left no sustained legacy of mass participation.
14. Top slicing of budgets has left organisations
vulnerable and resulted in them seeking funding and sponsorship
through other means, principally the private sector. In the culture
sector the pool to source funding from is limited, not just because
the various organisations are vying for funding from a restricted
number of sponsors, but also due to the recession having caused
greater difficulty in attracting sponsorship or donations.
15. Funding, whether from central government
or the private sector for projects is frequently ring-fenced and
therefore cuts are being made elsewhere in the organisations,
which inevitably has an impact on the cultural legacy that will
be left on the protection of objects, the experience of visitors
and refurbishment of the fabric of buildings.
16. We are also aware of proposals by the
Conservative Party to introduce a Museums and Heritage bill that
will decouple the link between National Museums and Galleries
and other NDPBs from the civil service so that they are run as
autonomous bodies.
17. This bill gravely concerns us as we
believe that instead of these great public institutions being
run for the British public they will suffer from increased commercialisation
and competition. This could potentially restrict research, learning
and possibly access, as the private sector will look for a return
on its investment, rather than being the guardians of the nation's
cultural heritage. Recent events in the economy should be a warning
that reliance on sponsorship is tenuous and that the nation's
cultural heritage should not be a hostage to world markets.
18. The demands for greater efficiencies
have resulted in damages to public services and our members' terms
and conditions being eroded. Our perception is that many initiatives
introduced across the culture sector are for short term gain rather
than based on a long term perspective.
19. National Museums and Galleries, the
Sports Councils and the myriad of other organisations we represent
members in are focused on immediate results in terms of efficiency
savings. This has therefore affected the quality of their exhibitions,
most notably at the Science Museum, and the status, terms and
conditions of our members. For instance at the Science Museum
they have introduced a two tier workforce with certain categories
of staff employed on its Trading Company contracts, thereby removing
access to benefits and particularly the pension scheme enjoyed
by other staff directly employed by the museum. The resulting
reduction in morale and commitment to the institution of those
staff affected is evident and will impact on the corporate drive
to achieve targets, the visitor experience and the ability to
attract a diverse workforce.
20. Over the last few years the outsourcing
of services has increased in the culture sector and we believe
the service to the public has lessened, again putting a positive
future legacy at risk following 2012. We are acutely aware of
the detrimental impact this can have on service delivery. For
example the increase in the number of thefts after the security
function was privatised at the V&A and the lowering of standards
when cleaning was outsourced at the Natural History Museum.
21. We are concerned that with this outsourcing
of services opportunities for a more diverse workforce decrease—both
in terms of ethnicity and choice of employment. We believe that
those directly employed in the culture sector should not be an
elite Oxbridge group doling out culture to the masses but should
be reflective of the rich diversity of our society, enabling opportunities
to be part of the heritage workforce, whether as a cleaner, retail
assistant or academic. PCS strongly believes that outsourcing
reduces opportunities for people wanting to get into cultural
employment and as we see everyday museums, galleries and other
heritage organisations are currently failing in being diverse
employers, which we believe is not the great cultural legacy the
nation should be left with.
22. In order to develop a legacy we can
be proud of, particularly with regards to mass participation in
sports we believe that there should be consultation with and involvement
of the third sector. However, proper funding for this sector should
be rooted through the public sector in order to achieve equitable
outcomes in terms of access and participation in sporting activity.
Also where sponsorship can be drawn down, this should be additional
to, rather than replace public resourcing. For understandable
reasons there is concern about sanctioning the use of volunteers
to do work that should be paid for and we would not condone the
practice of exploiting the opportunity of involving local enthusiastic
volunteers in communities as cheap labour.
How success in delivering lasting legacy can be
measured
23. Our members are highly dedicated to
the sector. They want to provide a quality service to the public;
therefore they want a successful lasting legacy of the Olympics
to include a lasting and sustained increase in the grass-roots
participation in sport and local culture. This cannot be achieved
though if the government and management view greater accessibility
and participation at the cost of good working conditions for their
workforce.
24. PCS recognises that there is a need to measure
outputs for a short-term understanding of how many people are
getting involved in activities. This allows organisations to demonstrate
they are meeting the output targets, but as discussed earlier
we firmly believe that organisations must be given targets then
left alone for a specified time to embed their strategies to ensure
greater outcomes can be delivered.
25. We believe that as well as measuring
the outputs, outcomes should be evaluated so that progress over
time can be demonstrated. It is crucial we measure the outcomes
to understand the long-term impact of our interventions. Participation
in sport, visitor numbers and the shift in how people get involved
with sport/culture will change slowly, as it's a generational
shift.
26. A practical way of the government gauging
the impact of the legacy we believe can be achieved through adding
an appropriate question in DCMS's "Taking Part" survey.
In earlier versions the survey had a question asking "Do
you think winning the bid to host the 2012 Olympics has motivated
you to do more sport or recreational physical activity?"
This year—year 5 (2009-10) the question has been taken out,
but is to be re-instated for year 6 (2010-11). We would therefore
suggest that a question on wider cultural activity is included,
motivated by the cultural Olympiad.
27. PCS would also suggest looking at the
value and other benefits that involvement in cultural and sporting
activities can foster, in previous research benefits have included:
— improved health and well being;
— improved mental health;
— a reduction in crime and an increase
in community safety;
— improved social cohesion;
— improved education and lifelong learning;
— the positive economic impact; and
— the contribution to the regeneration
of local communities.
CONCLUSION
28. PCS therefore believes that we should
return to the original vision of the Olympic bid and that there
needs to clear ownership of the Olympic legacy. We also believe
there should be a clarification on what the legacy means and we
would recommend that feedback is sought from stakeholders. PCS
urges that achieving a legacy, which no other country has done,
should not be at a cost to the committed workforce in the culture
and sport sector where due to privatisation and outsourcing our
members terms and conditions have been eroded.
29. In addition, the importance of joined up
working between the cultural institutions, local government, central
government, Sports Councils and governing bodies needs to put
in place and sustained.
30. Finally we believe that the Olympic
legacy should encompass the involvement and benefit to the United
Kingdom as a whole and not, as some fear be purely London/England
focused.
January 2010
| 
