New Labour Promoting Physical Activity and Sports in Young People - Coursework Example

How effective has the New Labour Government been in promoting young people’s participation in physical activity and sport? When the New Labour came to power under the leadership of Tony Blair, a key component of its election manifesto included “ensuring physical health of British youth”. More than ten years on, this promise remains largely unfulfilled. The New Labour’s contribution in promoting physical fitness among the young should be seen in light of two concepts – policy implementations and political rhetoric. While the former is undoubtedly a more effective tool for achieving set goals, the latter is not as superficial as it might seem. Over the course of the last ten years, the New Labour had attempted (in varying degrees of earnestness) to inculcate in the youth the values of a healthy body, to go along with a healthy mind. The rest of this essay is an exercise in determining how successful the New Labour government has been in promoting physical activity and sports in young people. New Labour’s election manifesto of 1997 promised to put an end to the practice of converting playing fields into residential and commercial complexes. But as of 2006, a further 2,560 playgrounds have been “concreted over” (Laker, 2002). This is in contradiction to the government’s official rhetoric on improving physical sport participation in youth. It also does not help the cause, when a prominent member of the ruling party openly endorses housing schemes in place of playing fields. The guilty parliamentarian in this case is John Prescott, whose passion for residential complexes in the South-East has meant that the “planning applications for property development on playing fields rose from 590 in 2000 to 1,413 in 2004”. It goes without saying that promoting physical activity and sports in young people ‘will not’ happen when the young are deprived of playgrounds. This trend extends further, as the following passage explains: “The lack of facilities means that a quarter of secondary schools cant teach physical education properly, according to Ofsted. True, new swimming pools have been built - but in private health clubs. Eight of Londons public pools and lidos have closed since Labour came to power, and at least six more are under threat…In 2012, the world will turn its gaze on London. What it will see, unless someone can do for school sports what Jamie Oliver did for school dinners, is a city of junior couch potatoes” (The Evening Standard, 2006). Similarly, Education Secretary Alan Johnson betrays a lack of perspective when he announced a ban on crisps and chocolate for young people. Not only does this stand in contradiction with Tony Blair’s promise to give schools greater autonomy from political diktats, but also misunderstands the real issue. The problem with school and college going British youth is not so much their eating habits but almost always their sedentary lifestyle. Helping youngsters to participate and enjoy sporting activities would be the ideal solution. But as is the case with British politics, “logic and coherence must always yield to ministers insatiable appetite for targets, initiatives and five-year plans” (Laker, 2002). Moreover, there is a fundamental flaw with the Government’s conception of what is “overweight”. The authorities have based their analysis on the Body Mass Index (BMI) alone. When this is employed as the sole yardstick for determining if a child is overweight or not, the results will inevitably be skewed. The Department of Health reckons that more than a third of British school children are either “overweight or obese” based on BMI calculations. But a recent study by the New Scientist magazine has found that Brad Pitt and George W Bush are both overweight by BMI standards. Certainly, both these gentlemen have been fitness enthusiasts for a long time and will dispute this finding. However, even if we accept the fact that youngsters are heavier now than what youngsters were a generation back, the reason is quite clear: they dont get enough exercise and not because they are gorging themselves on crisps all day (The Daily Mail, 2006). Conclusive evidence for the failure of New Labour government in promoting physical fitness activities among the nation’s youth comes from the contingent it sent to Athens Olympics of 2004. The total number of athletes from the United Kingdom who participated in the 2004 edition of this global meet was the smallest since 1976. The number of track and field athletes representing Britain is smaller by a third when compared to number who participated in the year 2000 Olympics in Sydney. Going by the available statistic on the British contingent for this year’s Olympics Games in Beijing, the situation has seen no significant improvement. The reason for this abject state of British sport is illustrated in the following passage: “Only about 50 athletes headed to Athens, compared with 75 in Australia four years ago. It is the smallest team since the Montreal Olympics in 1976. Just 35 have managed to achieve the standards required for automatic qualification. This is despite a [pounds sterling] 2.9million annual injection of lottery funding. Campaigners blame the poor turnout for the Olympics on a lack of sport in schools. A report by education watchdog Ofsted this month revealed that more than a third of pupils are not getting the recommended two hours of physical education each week. Since Labour came to power, there have been over 200 applications to turn pitches into supermarkets, housing and car parks”. (Charlotte Gill, 2004) Government officials have been in prime form in giving twisted and contrived rationale for this dismal state of affairs. In a reflexive self-defensive response, the British Olympic Association has cited tougher qualification standards and the increasing number of participating countries as the primary reasons for the diminishing of the athletics team. According to other government apologists, one of the reasons to phase out competitive sports from youth lifestyles is in order to “spare them the humiliation of losing”. As an alternative, they are promoting group activities based on “co-operation” rather than “competition”. The lowest point for this policy framework came in 2004, when Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell “supported a move to replace traditional events such as the egg and spoon races with problem-solving exercises” (The Daily Mail, 2006). This kind of official antipathy to competitive sport has resulted in a decline in physical fitness standards among British youth. Nearly half of all schools in Britain did not schedule a competitive day of events in the year 2004. In a desperate backtracking exercise this week, she urged schools to bring back sports days. According to Nick Seaton, chairman of the Campaign for Real Education, “Over recent years the emphasis on school sport and PE has deteriorated to an alarming degree. It seems fairly obvious that the long-term effects will be this paucity in athletic prowess. Also the consistent selling of sports fields must be hugely detrimental” (Seaton, 2004). The New Labour government, in the last eleven years at the political helm, seems to have neglected an important fact – that sport and academic achievement are not mutually exclusive and that regular physical exertion actually helps cognitive functions. According to James Mills, “Depriving boys of regular involvement in games such as rugby and football increases their risk of underachieving in class and drifting into crime. Competitive sports are particularly important for boys, who regularly underachieve academically compared to girls. Excelling on the playing field can boost the status of less academic boys and motivates them in class.” (James Mills, 2007) This view is supported by Professor Ann Buchanan, who compiled the report named ‘Barriers to Boys’ Attainment”. According to Professor Buchanan sports is good for the brain and is a positive way of “gaining status and using energy”. But, unfortunately, under the governance of New Labour, sports have suffered neglect. In an attempt to make an egalitarian society, New Labour has phased out most sporting events in schools because “not every participant can be a winner”. Such distorted egalitarian policies further deter literacy levels among boys, who are biologically disposed to lag behind girls. For example, boys starting secondary school education are one year behind girls in skills such as speaking, comprehension, etc. The Bishop of Rochester put forward the view that when adolescent boys cannot expend their natural energy in sporting activities, they tend to channel it toward anti-social behaviours. He further states that “Rather than slapping Asbos on boys we have to make sure they have physical activities to channel their energy in schools. There is growing concern that risk-taking and adventure is being removed from childhood, mainly because of the health and safety culture and the fear of being sued” (The Evening Standard, 2006). Under heavy criticism from all quarters of society, the Department for Education and Skills has finally woken up to the cries of the discontented. A spokesperson for the Department announced early last year that a billion pounds sterling was allocated for underachievers to cover their special tuition and catch-up classes. The department further plans to increase the minimum required playing time for children from two to four hours a week. But, such measures have not appeased the critics yet. The Ministers related to the Department of Education and Skills were criticized for spending 2.2 million pounds sterling of tax-payer money on installing a educative website which “warns children they must not offend ethnic minorities when choosing a pets name. The website (www.DirectgovKids.co.uk) also advises youngsters of their rights to play as they tour a virtual town asking questions. Tory education spokesman David Willetts said the site, which had only had 8,218 hits in its first three weeks, was in danger of being an expensive white elephant. The Department for Education and Skills responded by stating that the site was a fun way of explaining key issues”. (Mills, 2007) For all the criticism the Tory government attracted for its fiscal policies under the leadership of Margaret Thatcher first and later John Major, they did preserve conditions for British sporting tradition. But the same cannot be said of the New Labour under Tony Blair’s leadership. We saw earlier how playing fields are being converted into housing schemes, shopping malls, etc. The Labour government is equally generous when it comes to closing down public swimming pools and baths. Former Olympic swimming gold medallist Duncan Goodhew criticized the recent trend in major cities in the UK where at least three swimming pools come under threat of closure or disrepair each month. Minister for Sports Richard Caborn acknowledged the gravity of the situation and agreed that this problem was of the same magnitude as that of the controversial playing fields sell-off, which has taken the sheen off some of the policy successes of the Tony Blair administration. Given the growing number of overweight or obese youngsters in the country, the New Labour government should focus more on building leisure and fitness infrastructure instead of showing an indifferent attitude. Further, “Labour came to power pledging to protect playing fields but has allowed thousands of pitches at school and community sites to be concreted over. Now swimming pools are facing the same fate, as cash-strapped local authorities prioritise other services. Councils regard pools as easy targets in cost-cutting exercises because they have no statutory duty to provide them…Its a very worrying situation…In London, 12 or 13 are under threat or have been closed recently. We have to ask ourselves a basic question: Do we want every child in this country to be able to swim? If we do, we have to have a real look at what needs to be done” (Penney, 2002). So, from evidence gathered from official as well as independent sources, the New Labour government is doing the opposite of what it promised in its election manifesto of 1997. While targets have been set for local governing bodies to meet, none of them concern swimming or other leisure activities. Hence, what we are seeing is the migration of funds originally allotted for health clubs and swimming pools. The situation is quite similar to the fate suffered by playing fields in the United Kingdom. When the problem was brought to the parliament floor for discussion, the Sports Minister continued to be on the defensive, justifying the trend by asserting that “it was unacceptable that some pools were subsidising each swimmer to the cost of 5 pounds sterling a head because the facilities were so costly to run” (Penney, 2002). Further analysis of available statistics reveals that there are more functioning swimming pools now than it had been for decades, but most of them are owned by private membership clubs. This means that swimming has become unaffordable for large sections of the society due to high membership fees. Since New Labour came to power in 1997, eight swimming pools in London have been closed. There are only 104 public pools and lidos in London, with the number expected to reduce further. Public unrest is already manifesting itself in the form of protests and demonstrations. For example, quality facilities such as Kentish Town baths in North London saw public protests recently. The West Midlands region is expected to be the worst affected as two in three swimming pools there are in states of disrepair. Three public swimming pools in Bristol were sold-off to realtors, with another four earmarked for shut-down. As many as 12,000 people “signed petitions to save Brierley Hill baths in Wolverhampton which finally shut its doors on Saturday”. According to Noel Winter, facilities officer for the Amateur Swimming Association, the Labour government has drastically cut-down expenditure on sporting infrastructure. He adds, The Government is saying we want more people to take part in exercise and activity. They want a 1 per cent year on year increase in the number of people swimming, but they wont get that if there are no facilities. A lot of it comes back to the Government and being able to find the money somewhere, particularly if building new pools cuts the costs of the National Health Services” (Clark, 2003). After drawing accusations of indulging in gimmick politics, the New Labour government, now led by Gordon Brown, is bent on setting its record straight. In a recent meeting, the Prime Minister said he would dedicate 459 million pounds sterling for “a major expansion of extracurricular sports and competitive fixtures”, which was promised to the electorate in New Labour’s bid for a third successive term at the helm. This sentiment was expressed by Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell as well, who declared that it was high time the nation overturned the politically correct nonsense of the 1980 Tory idea that competition damages children. But to be fair, there were advocates for non-competitive games from the left of the political spectrum as well. Miss Jowell went on to add that “There is a lot more to do and I hope we will make more firm commitments to do more and go further. I am wholeheartedly behind more competitive sports for children and I want to see competition between schools. What competing in sports does is to teach children how to win and lose - which is not only good for them when they are at school but stands them in good stead for the rest of their lives. It teaches discipline, self respect and how to cope with winning and losing”. (Chapman, 2008) If the rhetoric from Gordon Brown’s office is anything to go by, the Prime Minister will be unveiling plans to utilize half a billion pounds every year for “specialist sports training and expanding extracurricular sports” (Barrett, 2004). In a typical case of real politick, the New Labour is claiming credit for the unexpected Olympic success of 17 year old boxer Amir Khan. Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell said that “If we are exposing children to a very wide range of sport with all the proper safeguards and protections, I wouldnt object to boxing being one of the sports”. Eloquent rhetoric is one thing but actual implementation of policies is quite another. In this context, the prudent words of Nick Seaton, chairman of the Campaign for Real Education is highly relevant: “It is essential that for the first time in its sports policy this Government follows its words with actions. Im afraid weve heard all this about a return to competitive sport before. Fine words are one thing, serious action to remedy the situation is quite another” (Chapman, 2008). The government’s policy framework with respect to health and fitness education has some glaring drawbacks. The “obesity screening” programme announced by the Blair government in 2006 has drawn criticism from all quarters of British society. The programme proposes to send parents of obese primary school children “an official letter warning that the kid had better shape up or else…” While officials in the Department of Health agree that such a measure could cause emotional turmoil for the kids in the form of “stigmatization and bullying” by their peers, they nevertheless insist on giving it a try. Considering that young children are “very sensitive about their own size and that of children around them", the initiative is grounded on thin rationale indeed. Critics point out that while it may marginally reduce the number of children with obesity, it would come to haunt them as adults in the form of neurotic illnesses such as anorexia or bulimia. When all things are considered, this measure comes across more as a political stunt rather than a sincere effort to curb “an obesity epidemic" in schools (Barrett, 2004). It seems that the negative publicity raised by the selling-off of playgrounds is finally being heeded to by New Labour leadership. The Department for Children, Schools and Families has initiated Fair Play – Have Your Say activity poster on 3rd of July 2008. This campaign is in response to the recognition that “all children and young people should be able to play somewhere local, accessible and safe…and those children should have a say in what their play areas look like” (www.dcsf.gov.uk). Questionnaires are circulated to children to gain an understanding of their preferences for play spaces. In order to encourage participation in this activity, a first prize of a digital camera is announced. This government programme is still open as of compiling this essay; and its effectiveness will not be known until at a future date. But, it has to be kept in mind that this miniature referendum project carried out by the government may not reverse the adverse consequences of thousands of playing fields that were sold out to the real estate industry over the course of Tony Blair’s regime. With a view to address the decline in British sporting tradition, the New Labour government set up an enquiry commission. Called Raising the Bar, the commission was headed by former sports ministers Kate Hoey and Lord Moynihan. They drew up a list of recommendations, which are listed below. Taking these recommendations seriously would be the way forward for New Labour and serves as a fitting conclusion to this essay:: 1. The sport system in Britain needs a complete overhaul at all levels – starting from grassroots, schools, colleges, right up to Olympic level. 2. The commission proposed prescribing ailing patients with suitable physical exercise. This is in addition to the essential medication that they take. A key area where this proposal is highly relevant is disorders such as “teen depression, anxiety”, etc (Clark, 2007). There are many studies that support the view that regular physical exercise can mitigate depressive symptoms in people from all age groups including teenagers. 3. The disparity in sporting achievement between pupils of independent schools and public schools need to be reduced. While independent schools account for only 7 percent of total school goers in the UK, they produce two in three medal winners in Olympic Games. Consequently, the vast majority of British school goers (93 percent) are deprived of genuine opportunity for sporting excellence. 4. The committee also found that independent schools achieve four hours of sport every week and also boast of better sporting infrastructure. Consequently, the committee recommends that students from all schools should have “four compulsory hours within the curriculum each week, plus two optional hours in sports clubs after school at no cost. Currently, many children have just a few minutes a week of sport in school” (Clark, 2007). 5. They Hoey and Moynihan committee attributed this state of affairs to more than 30 organisations that have had a direct or indirect hand in delivering these results due to “inefficiencies, excessive bureaucracy, inadequate delivery mechanism and delays in decision-making” (Capel, 2004). The committee urged these organizations to improve their effectiveness. 6. We saw earlier, how the Blair government made several public announcements stating the amount of money it allocated for developing a culture of sport among the British youth. As is the curse with any bureaucratic system, there is a disconnection between policy initiatives and actual results. The New Labour style of functioning is not an exception to this rule and as a result, the committee has identified alarming delays in spending cash assigned for sport. For example, a 750 million pounds sterling prize announced in 2000 was still overdue by January 2005. In the first four years after the announcement, only 40 out of the total 750 million grants have been utilized. This is a major concern that needs redress. 7. While Physical Education is mandatory in the curriculum, it does not specify how long the students should spend on the activity. The report recommends four hours a week of mandatory sport activity with two optional hours after school. It says: “Currently, time devoted to playing sport in the majority of our State schools is pitiful” (Capel, 2004). 8. Another aspect of school sport that the Hoey-Moynihan committee touches upon is “teacher training”. A majority of Physical Education teachers have “little or no structured training and frequently have to make use of makeshift facilities”, although they make an earnest attempt to impart sporting skills to students with the limited training and infrastructure that is at disposal. Consequently, a generation of children attending state schools has been failed by the New Labour government. References: Barrett, D. (2000, April 6). Young Couch Potatoes Urged to Be Good Sports. The Birmingham Post (England), p. 6. Barwick Must Rid Football of This Curse. (2005, February 28). The Daily Mail (London, England), p. 85. Britain Lives in Fear of Its Teenage Tearaways. (2006, October 23). The Daily Mail (London, England), p. 25. Bush, J. E. (1999). United We Stand: The Anti-Competitive Implications of Media Ownership of Athletic Teams in Great Britain. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 32(5), 1445. Can MPs Teach Us to Be Healthy? Fat Chance. (2004). 27. Capel, S. (Ed.). (2004). Learning to Teach Physical Education in the Secondary School: A Companion to School Experience (2nd ed.). London: RoutledgeFalmer. Child Obesity U-Turn. (2007, November 3). The Daily Mail (London, England), p. 12. Children Benefit from Sale of Playing Fields. (2004). 25. Clark, N. (2003, September 8). Neoliberals Frighten the Horses: In Its Mania for More Competition, New Labour Now Threatens the Future of Racing. New Statesman, 132, 26. The Day I Met Blair; FOUR ORDINARY MIDLANDERS GIVE THEIR VERDICT ON PM. (2007, May 13). Sunday Mercury (Birmingham, England), p. 12. A Field Day for Criminals. (2005, December 27). The Daily Mail (London, England), p. 14. Garnham, N. (2001). Both Praying and Playing: "Muscular Christianity" and the YMCA in North-East County Durham. Journal of Social History, 35(2), 397+. How State Schools Are Denying a Generation Its Sporting Chance. (2005, September 23). The Daily Mail (London, England), p. 6. How the Lack of Sport in School Is Breeding Yobs. (2007, April 23). The Daily Mail (London, England), p. 28. KNOW YOUR PLACE; Britain Is Still a Nation Divided by the Class System. but Is the Lefts Ugly Obsession with Inclusion Now Destroying Social Mobility?. (2005, March 12). The Daily Mail (London, England), p. 16. Labour Promises More School Sport. (2004). 6. Laker, A. (2002). The Sociology of Sport and Physical Education: An Introductory Reader. London: Routledge Falmer. A LEGEND COMES TO LIFE FOR [Pounds Sterling]10, 000. (1996, January 14). The Mail on Sunday (London, England), p. 31. Lejeune, A. (1985, July 12). Soccer Madness. National Review, 37, 31+. Now Labour Pulls the Plug on Swimming Pools. (2006, January 4). The Daily Mail (London, England), p. 19. Our Olympic Flops; Athletics Squad Is Smallest in 30 Years. (2004). 9. Penney, D. (Ed.). (2002). Gender and Physical Education: Contemporary Issues and Future Directions. London: Routledge. REHASH REHEAT RECYCLE; Forget the Rhetoric, Whats the Truth Behind Those Ten Promises?. (2004). 8. The Schools That Must Do Better; EVEN A UNION BOSS IS DEMANDING A RETURN TO BASICS AS THE TESTS FOR 11- YEAR-OLDS SHOW HOW PRIMARIES ARE FAILING OUR CHILDREN. (1996). 6. Smith, A. (1989). New Measures of British Service Outputs. National Institute Economic Review, (128), 75+. SNP Abandons Pledge to Recruit Extra 1,000 Police; Kenny MacAskill: No Target Set Alex Salmond Manifesto Pledge. (2007, November 5). The Daily Mail (London, England), p. 19. Soccer Tycoon Who Took a [Pounds Sterling]1m Kick at the Tory Party; AS TONY BLAIR WELCOMES A SUPPORTER FROM MAJORS FAVOURITE CLUB. (1996, September 7). The Daily Mail (London, England), p. 19. Tweney, C. F. & Hughes, L. E. (Eds.). (1958). Chamberss Technical Dictionary. New York: Macmillan. Vote for Citys Top Sporting Heroes. (2004, May 21). Coventry Evening Telegraph (England), p. 30. Weigh It All before You Put That Cros in the Box. (2005, May 2). The Daily Mail (London, England), p. 61. A Weighty Stigma for Our Young. (2006, May 23). The Evening Standard (London, England), p. 12. Wichstrom, L., & Pedersen, W. (2001). Use of Anabolic-Androgenic Steroids in Adolescence: Winning, Looking Good or Being Bad?. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 62(1), 5. Read More