Changing Government Sports Policy - Coursework Example

Changing Government Sport Policy The huge disparity between the 1948 austerity Olympics and the substantial government investment in the 2012 games clearly shows the big step UK has made both politically and in sports since the Second World War despite lack of consensus on the role of government in sport policy. The history of sports policy began with Harold Wilson in 1960s before Margaret Thatcher’s failure to sustain and improve the policies. John Major, who took over from Thatcher evidently established the sport policy that later acted as a foundation for Blair-Brown governments to build on. This paper explores how Government attitude and policy towards sport has changed and evolved over the last 25-30 years. Thatcher’s Reign It is at times challenging to believe that policy formulation has remained a uniform process for the last 30 years. During Thatcher’s government, Sports was never given much attention that it deserve since Thatcher was unconcerned about sports as it could even be proved in 1980 when she failed to persuade British athletes not to attend 1980 Moscow Olympics in disapproval of the soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Thatcher who concentrated mostly on the ways of improving the economy and increasing government revenues was forced to form a conventional policy response in 1981 after riots, which led to the introduction of action sports due to the corporation between labor services commission and the sports council (Sarantakes 147). Very little emphasis was put on sports hence making the sports council to maintain the preceding years’ drive with greater opposition from the conservatives questioning the need and function of the Council or the Sports ministry. Many appointments of sports ministers were made by Thatcher, which signified low precedence accorded to recreation and other social activities (Bloyce and Smith 38). Thatcher’s appointees in sports ministry could not make impact in the sports sector and were even put to work as under secretaries at the DOE due to less priority given to sports in her administration (Houlihan and White 28-33). In fact, within Conservative circles, there was no sound and positive strategy towards sport due to inadequate concern of the sporting sector. There were number of events that marked disregard for sports apart from failure to convince to convince the athletes not to attend the major Olympic event, her sports ministers could not great enough backing to implement sports policies such as the bid to host Olympics. The schools sporting policy was also undermined by reducing the government spending to sustain and improve the structure (Houlihan and White 28-33). During Thatcher’s reign, most schools’ playing grounds were lost to other developments as the sports teachers and their working conditions were frustrated. The school sports just went into record decline due to disregard for the important activity by the government, which could not see the sense and the benefits of sports. Thatcher supposed that sports are just an event that brings public shame due to the hooliganism involved especially in soccer. Thatcher’s government was busy working on issues that would deter the government operations such as reducing the powers of trade union, powers of the trade unions and improving school syllabus (Houlihan and White 28-33). Major’s Reign If it were not for political failure, Major’s reign was among the turning points in the sport policy in Britain since he endeavored to improve the sport department but all was in vain. However, the situation in the sport industry was improved between 1990 to 2010 when Major remedied the failures in the industry. Great policies and strategies were formed and improved perhaps because of the Major’s love for sports. Major realized the importance of sporting in relation with politics. Sports attracted a large number of people due to its social and cultural nature thus increasing political opportunities. Major felt that failure to tap on sports implied a huge political failure because of the number of people who loved and were deeply involved in sports (Bloyce and Smith 38). One of the utmost accomplishment in sports during Major’s reign was to introduce important new sources of revenue for the privileged grass root sport via the National Lottery which led to magnificent increase in sport investments especially in capital projects. Major’s administration, included a number of investments in sports that arose from the treasury grants that remained static throughout (Collins 123-124). Nonetheless, Major was said to be delivering less than he pledged in sports as enhancement of sports was very slow especially funding to athletes, which could not make them equal to other international athletes. Majors slow concern in sports development is attributed to poor performance at the Atlanta Olympics in 1996 that resulted into Britain taking position 36 in the table of medal and the numerous 1990s failures in sports industry. There was a recorded immaturity in sports management during Major’s reign probably because the other top government organs and the political elites did not equally receive his passion for sports. Major’s reign did not see the revival of school sports because school sports remained unpopular just like during Thatcher’s administration. Administrations of Thatcher and Major but especially Majors was accompanied with expansion and development of sports facilities as the growing interest of the government in sports led to development of sports governing bodies that formed an integral part in forming sport policies(Collins 123-124). The interesting modification of the ideological, organizational, and monetary context of welfare that the conservative administration was committed to formed a basis through which sports development emerged as it was accompanied by series of picky restructuring and policy innovations in sports, education, youth work and competitive tendering (Houlihan and White 28-33). Education was the main target, this affected PE as the issue of competitive sport was debated over, and the agreed resolution was to commence customized forms of adult sports that fit the learners’ needs and develop more skills related to strategic understanding. It was later argued that PE could not address or improve the pupils’ health and therefore individual need of every student would be addressed separately. Sports policy was designed in achieving the social goals as it was geared towards solving riots and unrest among urban cities (Houlihan and White 28-33). Policy Failures Funding constraints greatly affected the sporting sector during Thatcher or Major reign as both administrations did not value sports much except for Major who despite his love for sports, he could not get enough support from the political elites to promote the sector and this resulted into only 0.4% of all central government spending on sports. This was due to failure constitute a strong policy framework on sports and disregard to sports which even made sports ministry to be undermined. In fact, the sports council became less independence and was subjected to political disturbance that wanted it to be abolished due to its ineffectiveness (Houlihan and Lindsey 111-114). Major’s effort to reorganize the sports council bore no fruit and this later led to further disintegration of the council into elite and community sport between emerging organizations that were UK sport and sport England. Society projects became much useful in Thatcher’s regime thus giving the initiatives top priority by using children playing grounds for other projects. Major’s administration however tried to revive the sports facilities by strengthening the sports council by use of lottery funds to train elite athletes which made the council to develop Olympic sports (Collins 124-125). The political elites contributed greatly to the weak sport policies and this made sport occupy a lowly place in the political arena where even the sports ministers were deeply outgunned in the fight for resources by Whitehall’s great spenders (Houlihan and White 28-33). Conversely, it is important to note that the successes of Labour party administrations under Blair or Brown were greatly based on the Major’s policies in 1990s. The Coalition Government’s sport policy Sustainability of the sports sector was uncertain particularly in October 2010 after the announcement of massive plan of expenditure cut in the coalition era. David Cameron’s sport policy was thought to be commendable especially when the coalition partners determined not to frustrate preparations for the London games. Unlike Thatcher and Major’s administrations that did not embrace sporting activities, Cameron knew that London Games would bring plenty of advantages than the sporting event such as promoting trade, boosting countrywide peace and wellbeing. 9.3 billion pounds endured the expenses review as financing for elite athletes were secured in the medium period. Some essentials of success in Blair and Brown’s sport policies could not go well in this new government due to the economic challenges and cracks in the policymaking outline (Houlihan and Lindsey 119-120). There was an attempt to scrap the annual 162 billion pounds strategy used in sustaining School Sports Partnerships (SSP), which faced strong opposition from various sectors such as media, Olympic athletes, and some Mps. There was further temporal pardon of various 450 SSPs. Little amount of money was assigned to schools Olympics in combination with stoppage of ring- fenced financing integrating PE strategy (Houlihan and Lindsey 119-120). The government warned that any school that wanted to carry on with the sports partnership would be forced to use their own finances in funding the project. Unfortunately, the Labour’s wonderful program of reaching an additional million grown-ups annually and increasing the weekly sports participants in relation with community sport provision was also gently stopped (Sugden and Tomlinson 90). Generally, the policies that have been adopted by the coalition are not aimed at improving sports as far as funding and sport management is concerned. The government, just like during Thatcher’s regime has resorted to considering the economic perspective rather than the real benefits and other outcomes of sport as was witnessed in the London Games. The sad announcements by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on October 2010 made the critics remain surprised as the dark cloud hanged over the sport sector in UK due to huge spending cuts. The chancellor’s announcements included halving the spot department, shrinking sport England’s and UK budget by 33% and 28% respectively (Houlihan and Lindsey 119-120). The government however has brought back policy of competitive sport since it thinks that the level of competitive sport is not as high as it should be hence reducing the urge to participate in sports especially after the pupils leave school. The coalition government further entourages independent participation in PE by incorporating it in the education offered to boost children performance in academics (Owen Web). The coalition government has decided to sustain the schools values and PEs by setting 65 million pounds for two financial years ending 2012/2013 for release of secondary teachers to organize for competitive sporting and coaching primary teachers thus giving freedoms to schools to deliver sport as they want. Additionally, the government has expanded the range of Paralympics sports to young people which will increase chance for less active children to participate and inspiring kids to love sports by giving incentives to schools so that they can be encouraged to participate (Cryer Web). It is interesting to note that the Thatcher or Major’s regime and the coalition government of David Cameron are very different as far as sport in UK is concerned. Thatcher’s regime was one where the leader did not have interest in sports but only concentrated in issues that would boost the economy. Very few reforms were made but only under pressure from the public. It was therefore not easy for sport department to flourish as compared to other eras. Major, though he was willing to promote sports, he could not get the political goodwill and this greatly frustrated his efforts although some of his achievements can still be felt such as the famous John Major's 1995 document Raising the Game. The Coalition government has however tried to differentiate itself by setting some nice pace in the sport department such as competitive sport in schools and forming a strong sport docket that can come up with formidable sport policy. Nevertheless, David Cameron government’s bigger cut on sport spending is a big blow to the sport department. The regimes discussed above shows that when the central government finance sport in combination with lottery and local authority with the combination of sense of direction, urgency and coherence then sport can really go far. These issues were not fully addressed by these two regimes such as Thatcher and Major refused to sufficiently fund the sport sector. The aim of combining UK sport and England sport should be aimed towards achieving effective and efficient organization for sport. Both eras do not have satisfactory and sufficient sport policies that can be applauded. The coalition government should borrow heavily from other administrations and improve on them especially Major’s and Blair –Brown policy by adopting from Labour's 1975 White Paper Sport and Recreation and John Major's 1995 document Raising the Game. The government should also take into consideration that sport is an enormous source of revenue and every pound spent on it will definitely result into a wonderful dividend. Works Cited Bloyce, Daniel, and Smith Andy. Sport, Policy, and Development: An Introduction. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2009. Print. Collins, Michael F. Examining Sports Development. London: Routledge, 2010. Print. Cryer, Jon,. “Rough Guide to Coalition sport policy: Sports development.’ sport and physical activity academic resource.” Web 6 Apr. 2013. Gibson, Owen. ‘School sports policy launch delayed by dispute between Gove and Hunt: Delay caused by standoff between health and education departments over replacement for school sports partnerships.’ The Guardian, 20 Dec. (2012): Web 6 Apr. 2013. < http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/20/school-sports-policy-launch-delayed>. Houlihan, Barrie, and White Anita. The Politics of Sports Development: Development of Sport or Development Through Sport? London: Routledge, 2002. Print. Houlihan, Barrie, and Lindsey Iain. Sport Policy in Britain. New York: Routledge, 2013. Print. Sarantakes, Nicholas E. Dropping the Torch: Jimmy Carter, the Olympic Boycott, and the Cold War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Print. Sugden, John P, and Tomlinson, A. Watching the Olympics: Politics, Power and Representation. London: Routledge, 2012. Print. Read More