Government's Attitude and Policy towards Sport - Assignment Example

Critically examine how governments attitude and policy towards sport has changed and evolved over the last 25years. Review, contrast and compare the approaches of three styles of government in relation to this policy area-the conservatives under Thatcher and Major followed by Blair’s “New Labour”. Explore similarities and differences and draw on academic sources to support arguments. Sports have been an integral part of British life for many decades. They are both a practical attempt to enable the British to become fit, in their amateur ranks, and are also part of a national mythology, such as the Football World Cup win of 1966 and the Rugby World Cup win of 2003. Sports policy can also be regarded as a prism through which wider ideological and practical political thought can be viewed. The three governments of Margaret Thatcher/John Major (Conservative) and Tony Blair’s New Labour illustrate the contrasts that can be found within sports policy. As Houlihan (2002) suggests, “some policy areas are easier than others to plot and delimit”, and this is especially the case with sports which is often a fulcrum around which a number of forces, from education to national prestige to public health revolves. The Thatcher government adopted what may be regarded as a characteristically laissez-faire and privatized view of sports leadership at both the national and local level. One of her first actions as prime Minister was to boycott the 1980 Moscow Olympics as a protest against the Soviet invasion of Afgahnistan. Britain was no alone in this boycott, being joined by 62 other Western countries. One aspect of Thatcher’s policy that contrasted with the provision of money for various sports stadiums, organizations and for sports on school, something which every government since WWII had instituted was her government’s reaction to football hooliganism. Under watch football hooliganism took on massive and deadly proportions, such as the fights that occurred at the European Cup Final in Brussels in which 36 people were killed (Frosdick, 2005). Thatcher introduced a number of new laws and policies that would ban alcohol at grounds, increase police powers to control the behavior and size of the crowd, as well as introducing surveillance such as close-circuit TV cameras that had previously been regarded as an invasion of privacy. Football hooliganism was a fulcrum around which many forces revolved, including serious suggestions that a National Identity Card should be introduced, even though at its height the problem probably only involved a few thousand key members at the most. One of the major developments that came under John Major’s watch as Prime Minister was the formation of “UK Sport”, which became a central focus for sports management and encouragement in Britain. It was formed by Royal Charter in 1996 and became “responsible for managing and distributing public investment” within sports (uk sport, 2007). This was an example of Major’s “grey” personality that was neither aggressively Right nor Left while Prime Minsister, but rather sailing with the wind in a rather meandering fashion. Unlike Thatcher, Major was in fact a keen sports fan, with his primary love being cricket and a secondary interest in football. Major seems to have regarded sports as a vital part of British life and, perhaps most importantly, its heritage. Thus it was Major who created the Cabinet position of “Secretary of State for National Heritage” who would be responsible for the new Department of Culture, Media and Sport. In many ways the various embodiments of this position reflected the somewhat tenuous and eventually doomed nature of Conservative power during this period. For example, the short-lived tenure at the psot of David Mellor in 1992 was cut short when he became involved in a scandal in which he supposedly had an affair with the actress Antonia de Sancha, and apparently asked her to wear his Chelsea FC shirt while making love to her (!) (allexperts, 2007). Many within British society apparently did not take the responsibilities of this Minister particularly seriously, as he became known as the Minister of Fun. The second occupant of this post, Peter Brooke, survived for two years, but also caused controversy through appearing on The Late Late Show and singing “Oh My Darling Clementine” the day after a deadly IRA bombing. These anecdotal stories show that while John Major was perhaps serious in his support of sports, his choices for the position of the Minister responsible for them did not really reflect much forethought. In this manner his attitude towards sports could be regarded as a microcosm for his whole period as Prime Minister: he meant well, but gave the distinct impression of a man hopelessly out of his depth (both intellectually and politically) who had been thrust into a position more by accident than design. The Blair government under New Labour has adopted a more activist policy towards sports, in common with the idea that public government can be a positive good within a country rather than something to be avoided. The rather stodgy title of “Secretary of State for National Heritage” was immediately changed to the much more forward-looking, and specifically descriptive title of “Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport”. Soon after it came to power in 1997 it formed the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, which covers a wide range of activities. This Department guides and enacts government policy within sectors as diverse as “Alcohol and Entertainment”, “Creative Industries” , the “Government Art Collection”, “Humanitarian Assistance” and “Sport” (culture, 2007). The “Sport Section” of the Department announces its policy quite directly, stating that it “aim is to encourage wider participation in sport, helping to create a more active nation and improve performance . . . out vision is that the UK be re-established as a powerhouse in the sporting world” (culture, 2007) (emphasis added). A healthier, more sporting population will ead to better performances within sports that the British often invented but within which they now sadly often occupy the secondary echelons. These dual purposes are reflected throughout Blair’s sports policy. For example, in 2004 Blair announced that an extra 500,000,000 pounds would be set aside for staffing and facilities within schools so that school pupils would have a minimum of two hours physical education within school and 2-3 hours after school (direct, 2006). The reasoning behind this policy is familiar. Blair gave the following statement: This investment will give today’s children new opportunities to take part in sport – inside and outside the school gate and before, during and after the school day . . . sport is not only important for its own sake . . . it teaches kids how to win and lose and how to be part of a team . . . it is also important in tackling obesity in young people and can act as an antidote for anti-social behaviour by challenging their energies. (Blair, 2004) So Blair gives three basic reasons for the large amount of money being invested. First there is sports “importance for its own sake” which is not described in greater detail but which may include the social dimensions of teaching children “how to win and lose”. There is thus a social engineering element to sports through making them good citizens who will be able to cope with the ups and downs of life in an equitable manner. A further social benefit of sports is its supposed ability to essentially distract children/teenagers by challenging potentially negative energies into a positive environment. To be succinct, sports stops young people from getting bored. The health element is found within the tackling of obesity that sports may enable. Lessening the degree of obesity in childhood will naturally lead to slimmer (and healthier) adults, with a concomitant influence on expenses within the health service. The first Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport was Chris Smith. Smith was more well-known as being interested in the Arts than in sports, and is also note-worthy as being the first openly gay MP in British history. As with some of the sports ministers from the Tory regimes, Smith was well-known for his rather outspoken remarks, such as when he announced to a council meeting considering a ban on gay employees that “I’m Labor MP for Islington South and Finsbury . . . I’m gay and so for that matter are about a hundred other members of the House of Commons only they won’t tell you so openly” (allexperts, 2007). The position which has responsibility for sport went to Tessa Jowell in 2001, who once again seemed to concentrate more upon the other aspects of the position – in her case the proposed diversification of the BBC – than on sports. The policies regarding children naturally lead into professional sports and thus the status of the United Kingdom within world sports. The Culture, Media and Sports Secretary, Tessa Jowell stated that the investment in sport will allow more people to participate in sport and “making them ready, we hope, to shine at the London Olympics in 2012.” Further, “it will enable us to identify and nurture a new generation of sporting champions as we build up to the Beijing Olympics in 2008 and the possibility of a London Olympics in 2012” (direct, 2007). That possibility has now become an actuality, and Jowell’s comments succinctly illustrate how the provision of sports for millions of ordinary young people is linked to producing “champions” that will contribute to the overall stature of the country. Another important development from Blair has been the increased concentration upon the problems of drug-enhanced athletes and the dangers they pose both to themselves, and as role-models for millions. The government stated that it is committed to “promoting ethically fair and drug-free sport, with the aim of producing sportsmen and women who are competing and winning fairly” (uksport, 2007). As might be expected from New Labour, there is active government participation within this effort, including more than 8,000 tests yearly being performed on a wide range of athletes, with concentrations on the professional sports. The government is cognizant of the fact that some sportspeople may be confused as to what actually is legal/illegal, and what drugs may harm them even if they are legal to take. As such, Blair has introduced a broad education system to enable athletes to make the right decision based upon accurate information. On its website, UK Sport lists the “current list of prohibited substances” and also those positive cases that have been referred to it. The site lists the substance that was detected and, if a case was proven, the name of the actual player involved. Blair has attempted to produce some kind of structure within the highly complicated hierarchy of sports within Britain. As the government states, “the structure of sport in the UK, although complex, caters for the needs of sports at every level – from grass roots development and recreational sport through to the best sportsmen and women representing the UK on the world stage (uksport, 2007). To conclude, sports act as a focal point for many different forces with British society in general, and within the political establishment in particular. From Thatcher’s laissez-faire attitude, interrupted by having to deal with the problems of football hooliganism, through John Major’s characteristically non-descript attitude and on to the ‘more social good style’ of Tony Blair, sports act as a useful microcosm for wider political philosophies. It seems unlikely that if the Internet had existed at the time of Margaret Thatcher’s leadership (it did not) that the homepage for the government website promoting sports would have had a disabled athlete in a wheel-chair as it prime photograph. This is not to suggest that Thatcherism was in any way biased against the disabled, but rather that New Labour attempts in a more open and direct manner to be positively inclusive. The disabled man in his wheel-chair might be regarded as part of the same Labour philosophy that actively chose women as candidates in the 1997 elections. _______________________________________ Works Cited Frosdick, Steve. Football Hooliganism. Willan Publications, London: 2005. Houlihan, Barrie. The Politics of Sports Development. Routledge, London: 2002. http://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1 www.uksport.gov.uk Read More