Election Special: The Sporting Breakdown

With the General Election only 24 hours away, Sportindustry.biz provides a step-by-step guide to the three main parties’ top-line manifesto policies on sport, as well as previewing their stances on the big sporting issues and a look at the men vying to be the next Minister for Sport.

THE CONTENDERS

GERRY SUTCLIFFE (LABOUR): Sutcliffe, the man in possession, has been the Labour MP for Bradford South since 1994, and Minister for Sport since 2007. The 56-year-old has split loyalties when it comes to football having grown up supporting Manchester United but is a vocal Bradford City fan in his constituency. He is also a renowned goalkeeper for the all-party Parliamentary football team.

HUGH ROBERTSON (CONSERVATIVE): As Shadow Sports and Olympics spokesman, the 47-year-old Robertson has been a vocal campaigner in the build-up to the election on a host of sporting issues. He has been the Tory MP for Faversham & mid Kent since 2001 and supports Chelsea FC, and Kent CCC. He plays cricket and hockey, for Parliament and club sides, and played rugby in the army.

DON FOSTER (LIBERAL DEMOCRATS): Foster has been the Liberal Democrat MP for Bath since 1992 and the Liberal Shadow for Culture, Media and Sport since 2005. The 63-year-old is a major rugby fan and can often be seen ardently supporting Bath Rugby on the terraces at The Recreation Ground. A former rower, he still crews in the annual Lords v Commons boat race.

THE MANIFESTOS

LABOUR: Through its ‘Sports for All’ policy, Labour aims to provide every child with at least 5 hours of sport per week provided through improved facilities and 3,000 new sports clubs and a new national network of sports coaches. They have also promised to protect the integrity of professional sport – toughening measures to combat cheating and the use of illegal substances.

CONSERVATIVE: The primary promise of the Tories is to reinstate National Lottery funding levels for sport to 20% from the Big Lottery Fund. They are also seeking that part of the community sports budget of the Lottery will be responsible for delivering an Olympic legacy. At a grass-roots level, the party will implement a vigorous promotion of competitive sports in school through a national Olympic-style school competition.

LIBERAL DEMOCRATS: The sporting policy of the Liberal Democrats revolves around an emphasis on grass-roots and access-for-all to sport and culture through the UK. While the party is supportive of the bid for the football World Cup and the hosting of the Olympics, the Commonwealth Games and the Rugby World Cup, the party espouses that these should not be delivered at the expense of grass-roots sport.

THE BIG ISSUES

The Olympics

SUTCLIFFE (LAB): We will deliver an Olympics on time and on budget and be the first Olympic nation to create a world-class sports system. We have raised our ambition and will engage a new generation of young people in PE and sport, going from delivering two hours school sport per week to the opportunity of five hours; we will grow and sustain a significant increase in participation over and above the 600,000 people that has already been delivered; and achieve more medal success at the Olympics and Paralympics with a talent development system which is envy of the world, inspiring a new generation of British athletes spanning all disciplines and events.

ROBERTSON (CON): The single greatest issue facing London 2012 is the lack of a viable mass participation sports legacy. It was a promise made as part of the bid but, five years on, the government has not come forward with a viable plan. We have been looking at this with Dame Kelly Holmes and will produce a plan based on the development of facilities, coaches and volunteers.

FOSTER (LIB DEM): The biggest challenge in relation to the Olympics is in meeting the government’s legacy targets. When the Liberal Democrats pledged our support for the Olympic bid, we were promised that hosting the Games would provide a lasting sporting and economic legacy. Sadly at the moment the government is falling well-short of its targets in these areas. Whoever becomes the next Minister for Sport must make it an absolute priority to get more people active in the run up to the Olympics and beyond by targeting resources at grassroots, community and school sports.

Football Club Ownership

SUTCLIFFE (LAB): We have pushed for reform for 18 months and there has been some positive change but football needs to go much further; it is good to see the opposition parties now adopting our ideas on governance and reform. We will give football a fixed a period of months to deliver a much stronger financial regulatory structure which will include implementing Burns’ recommendations in full with more independence and more democratic accountability to their stakeholders, much greater scrutiny of takeovers – so that new owners show proof of funds and a clear business plan going forward – and a more unified system of governance including single fit and proper persons test. If there is no change then the government will consider intervention.

ROBERTSON (CON): In an ideal world, sport is run by its national governing bodies, not by government. Therefore, initially we would look to football to come forward with proposals to address the issues surrounding the Fit and Proper Persons Test, financial transparency, debt and, crucially, the governance of the game as there are not enough independent voices in the governance of football. If football fails to come forward with the necessary proposals, government will have no option but to step in.

FOSTER (LIB DEM): Swift action must be taken to toughen up the regulation of football and to strengthen the roles of The Football Association and The Football Regulatory Authority (FRA). The recent resignation of Ian Watmore was further evidence, if any was needed, of the need for reform to the structure of The FA. Bringing more independent directors onto the board of The FA, for example, would help to reduce the influence of the professional leagues and so ensure that The FA could play a more effective role in regulating the game. In addition, it is vital that the role of the semi-autonomous FRA is strengthened and that it takes over control of a unified Fit and Proper Persons Test operating for clubs at all levels. The current situation, in which the Premier League, Football League and FA all have their own Fit and Proper Persons Test with no independent oversight, is a mess and must be resolved if we are to have a robust system of ensuring that owners act in the best interests of the clubs.

The Listed Events TV Ruling

SUTCLIFFE (LAB): We believe whole heartedly in the principle of listed events, to ensure that the crown jewels of British sport are protected by law and offered to the main free-to-air broadcasters on fair and reasonable terms. We support the principle of events which are of national resonance being freely available to all rather than the Tory policy of forcing people to pay more to enjoy great British sporting events. Just look at the popularity of the Grand National recently. If the balance is right then most sports could benefit from increasing their exposure to a wider TV audience both in terms of advertising revenue and inspiring more people to take up sport. Before any decision is reached we will of course take into account the impact listing might have on a sport for the event in question and on those broadcasters affected.

ROBERTSON (CON): The Listed Events review was launched by the government for party political reasons in the belief that there were votes in restoring more events free to air. However, anyone who understands either sport or the broadcast market knows that this is not a simple issue and that taking away a sport’s ability to market its own broadcasting rights generally leads to a drastic reduction in income passing to the grassroots. In short, an intelligent balance has to be struck and I, therefore, greatly regret that the government has not commissioned an independent economic analysis so that the claims can be tested. Given that the broadcast market will change dramatically in 2012 with the introduction of free to air digital channels, I suspect a sensible holding solution would be to look at a smaller list of free-to-air events but restore the highlights package and mandate those governing bodies who retain their rights to invest a set proportion in the grassroots.

FOSTER (LIB DEM): I am broadly supportive of the recommendations of the David Davies Review. Listing still has an important role to play in ensuring that the best-loved sports events are available for the whole nation to enjoy. Some sports bodies are unhappy with the recommendations and argue that any changes to the existing arrangements will damage their ability to fund grassroots sport. We believe that a full, independent economic impact assessment should be carried out before any final decisions are made but in principle think that cricket could benefit from broadcasting home Ashes games on free-to-air channels. Such a move could bring in higher revenue from sponsorship deals and anyone bidding for the rights will have to pay a ‘fair and reasonable’ price for them.

Sources: Party Manifestos (various); The Independent