Options
Thank you, Sir John Major
Zeus
Posts: 10,459 Forum Member
✭✭
1996, Atlanta. Remember the ecstasy when Steve Redgrave and Matthew Pinsent won Team GB's solitary gold medal with the coxless pair?
One gold medal, eight silver, six bronze. Those athletes did us proud with the limited funding available.
But the Prime Minister of that time had a vision. Sports success, created by way of funds produced from a National Lottery.
16 years later, we see the result.
I never once voted for John Major's government and I wouldn't begin to pretend that they were any better than anything that came before or followed afterwards.
But if Tony Blair deserves credit for his part in winning the London bid, then John Major hasn't had enough for creating the foundations upon which the successes of 2012 stand.
There are many things we can knock Major for, but credit where credit is due. The success of Team GB in 2012 ultimately springs from his foresight.
One gold medal, eight silver, six bronze. Those athletes did us proud with the limited funding available.
But the Prime Minister of that time had a vision. Sports success, created by way of funds produced from a National Lottery.
16 years later, we see the result.
I never once voted for John Major's government and I wouldn't begin to pretend that they were any better than anything that came before or followed afterwards.
But if Tony Blair deserves credit for his part in winning the London bid, then John Major hasn't had enough for creating the foundations upon which the successes of 2012 stand.
There are many things we can knock Major for, but credit where credit is due. The success of Team GB in 2012 ultimately springs from his foresight.
0
Comments
How is it any different from John Major commiting taxed money into funding sports?
Because if Joe Public doesn't buy any Lottery tickets there isn't any money to finance it with. Yes the Government could raise a tax to be used to pay for sports and the arts and, indeed, part of current funding is already used for that.
The National Lottery taps into the private finances of the public to raise additional cash and, because there is the element of a potential reward, people tend to hand their cash over a lot easier.
So many of Britain's medals have come from VERY expensive systems rather than from individual endeavors.
Indeed - folks are providing the money voluntarily. Interesting statistic is that the bulk of the money from lottery comes from below median earners. Personally I do think that the Govt needs to be more creative in getting cash from the high earners who are actively involved in tax avoidance. Tax breaks for cash donated into UK Sports/Arts rather than it being squirreled outside of UK. It would be a great outcome if base taxes didn't have to fund Sport/Arts/Film.
I'd agree on the praise for Major if the playing fields were left alone but they're not and his administration sold of thousands.
'The government has sold two school playing fields every three months since 2010 – making a mockery of its pledge to secure an Olympic legacy for children.
Education Minister Michael Gove has rubber-stamped the sale of 21 pitches since coming to power, despite election promises to protect them.
Under the last Tory government around 10,000 school sports areas were sold, while 200 were lost during Labour’s 13 years in power'.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/london-2012-legacy-mo-farah-1234952
Well effectively Its still public money, as shown by the government's power over how it should be spent. Honestly don't get why they don't just lump in together with general public expenditure.
Indeed, and folk duo Show of Hands wrote a fabulous song about them selling off the fields back in the 1990s called Cutthroats Crooks and Conmen.
Camelot runs and operates the National Lottery and there are 13 different independent bodies responsible for handing out grants and funding from the money raised by it.
What responsibility does the government have to fund elite sport. its not the case of any other country i can see but it does provide genuine dividends and the public enjoy the results in those sports that have made good use of their funding settlements.
Personally i think the way the lottery plays out is a credit to the country. It provides funding for sports and the arts and removes *some* of the demands on taxpayers to fund it via government.
None now because the responsibility has been put on the public, prior to that it was govt because they assumed it when they decided lottery funding should be used and who get's the praise for it's success - you or govt? and who benefits from playing field sell offs - you or govt?
If they want to show they do care for sport then any money raised from selling off fields should be used to improve sports centers and also make them free for all to use.
After all It was public money that paid for schools and associated playing fields in the first place.
Incidentally the poor showing at Atlanta 1996 had nothing to do with the setting up of the Lottery as it was set up in 1993 and began operating in 1994.
Also sports funding is just one small part of the lottery's good causes output. A worthwhile cause, and one I as a sports fan am enjoying reaping the rewards of, but I find it a tad disappointing that crooks like Richard Desmond can hypocritically tap into the lottery market with emotive issues such as health by exploiting the weaknesses of National Lottery good causes, such as seemingly superfluous projects and initiatives which serve little interest or benefit to the public at large.
If you never saw Spitting Image you will be using this smiley
How many of the 10,000 sports areas (not pitches, fields or maybe includes sport halls?) were because schools closed?
Off the top of my head we have lost one upper school in the borough I live in and the pitches were taken over by the local trust/private school system.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/schoolsports/9457944/Olympic-legacy-21-school-fields-sold-off-in-two-years.html
Anyone thinking that the effects of the funding would produce results in only 2 years is a little naive.
Athletes training and improving over time is enabled in part to GB being able to bring in the best coaches now we can offer salary packages that compete with the superpower nations.
I don't play the National Lottery, but my flatmate and I were this week discussing how these Olympics have changed our perspective about the lottery and will be "in it to win it" in future. We no longer see it as a 'no-chance' flutter, but a vital homeland charity.
I find it interesting that, whenever I fly to, say, the US or Canada, I see LOADS of sports fields before landing. I'm sure space plays a part in this, but ethos and funding must do too?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/09/sir-john-major-london-2012-games?newsfeed=true
Whatever you think about his time as PM, he laid the foundations for the success in recent Games and the bid for the 2012 Olympics.
It's not all about money, of course it isn't, but funding is an important part of the receipe. It doesn't matter how good your eggs are, your cake will fail if you don't have enough flour.
I think a lot of people do. The idea of bringing the Olympics to this country started in the 90's according to a chap on BBC last night. But they didn't want to go up against Greece, and they knew they didn't stand a chance against China. So 2012 it was. Lots of people down the line have been responsible for this great event.
Major might have started the Lottery in 1994 but all the money went locally and not in general to sport. Major was into sport in a big way but his cabinet colleagues thought it was a waste of money.
It was only in 1997 when Labour got into power that Lottery money was put into sport and the Olympics and it is that legacy we see happening now. You can't put the praise of these Olympics to Major when he played just a small part.
He did most to prepare for the peace in NI. he was the last PM not be afraid to openly support Tibet.
It makes you wonder.
~ Frankie Boyle
Exactly. Major was a keen sportsman but his cabinet colleagues did not want lottery money spending on "elite" sports.