Sydney Paralympics and Olympic Games
Today's members' business debate is on motion S1M-1188, in the name of Mrs Mary Mulligan, on the Sydney Paralympics and the Olympic games.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament congratulates the Scottish Paralympians and Olympians on their success at the being selected for the Sydney games and congratulates the teams on their success in Australia.
I begin by congratulating all the athletes who took part in the Sydney Paralympics, especially the many who won medals. Of the sizeable team that went from Great Britain, 12 per cent were Scots—that is, 25 athletes taking part in a variety of sports, including swimming, shooting and track and field events. Scots lifted 23 per cent of the 131 medals that were won by the Great Britain squad, including seven gold medals, 13 silver medals and 10 bronze medals. That is a fantastic achievement by any standard. [Applause.]
How did all this begin? Members will know—if they have read the Capability Scotland briefing—that, when Capability Scotland was known as the Scottish Council for Spastics, it was one of the founding members of the Paralympic movement, through its involvement in the Cerebral Palsy International Sport and Recreation Association. The organisation has continued to play a key role in the promotion of sporting opportunities, and is at present providing services to nine Scottish members of the GB Paralympic team. Capability Scotland continues to operate programmes that provide and create sporting and recreational opportunities in a wide range of activities for adults and children.
The Sydney Paralympics brought the Paralympic movement to the attention of more people than ever before. The Australian authorities are to be congratulated on the way in which they promoted the 2000 Paralympics. In Sydney, tickets were sold at half price, to schools in particular, as part of Australia's disability awareness and education strategy. Another way in which people's awareness can be raised is by ensuring substantial media coverage. A BBC journalist reported that, when he arrived in Atlanta in 1996, the press centre that had been used for the Olympics was being dismantled and the phone lines and computers had gone. In Sydney, the facilities that had been provided for the Olympics were left intact.
There were also notable improvements in the sporting commentaries, which concentrated on athletic achievement rather than an individual's disability. In the coverage of the marathon, for example, the commentary concerned race tactics, times and competitors' previous records rather than their disabilities. Athletic prowess was the main issue. The media coverage of the Paralympics was better than ever before, but an hour a night on BBC2, and perhaps a few paragraphs in the sports pages, is not enough. The media have a responsibility to cover the Paralympics as they would any other sporting event of its magnitude. As customers, we should demand that they do so.
As do many other sports, disabled sport needs more money to nurture more athletes at all levels. It also needs stable funding over a long period, to enable greater participation. Funds are needed to provide coaches who have the specialist skills that are required.
To make the leap from promising athlete to champion requires support. I recognise the support given by Scottish Disability Sport as part of sportscotland. Paralympians have had lottery funding for one year, which has been of assistance. However, many commented on the performance of the Australian team, which won the most medals this year. The point was made that as the Australians had received four-year funding, they had been able to enjoy full-time training. I am sure that we all have great hopes for the future when our own Paralympians have had the same support.
The requirements of disabled athletes will be different. They may need additional health care or therapy; it can cost them more to travel; accessible accommodation can be hard to find or more expensive; and some may require a carer to accompany them. All that costs money. When funding packages are being agreed for individual athletes, all their needs must be taken into account and adequately funded. All athletes—disabled or not—need support for their everyday lives: adequate paid time off work for training and competing, appropriate local training facilities and support for their families. It will be a sign of real integration and acceptance of the athletic achievements of the Paralympians when their employers use their selection and success as a positive marketing tool for their companies in the same way that they do for non-disabled athletes. The development of sponsorship deals for Paralympians should also be encouraged.
Our Paralympians have taken great encouragement from the response that they have received from the people of Scotland. Let us not put that support away for the next four years, but let us resolve to continue to support our athletes and, in so doing, recognise that all our fellow citizens have the potential to achieve.
As a member of the Education, Culture and Sport Committee, I am very aware of the way in which sport can be used to allow individuals to raise their self-esteem, develop their talents and build team spirit. The motto of the Paralympians is "Mind, Body, Spirit". That is all-encompassing and should inspire all members to be inclusive and to give our Paralympians the support necessary for them to achieve their potential.
As is often the case, more members have indicated that they wish to speak than we are likely to have time for. If members keep their speeches brief, I will accommodate as many of them as possible.
I welcome the opportunity afforded by the debate to congratulate all the Olympians, Paralympians and their coaches on their success—medal winners or not. Although I welcome the debate and endorse everything that Mary Mulligan said, we could go a little further in showing our appreciation of the Paralympians' effort. Today, the Scottish Paralympians are resting—they flew back from Australia only recently and are too tired and jet-lagged to be with us. I suggest that Parliament or one of its committees give serious consideration to hosting a reception for the athletes. Perhaps an informal lunch would be appropriate to allow us the opportunity to hear about and congratulate them on their individual achievements and experiences—25 Scots in a 214-strong team, winning 31 medals, is outstanding.
On the whole, the Sydney Olympics has been a great success, particularly—as Mary Mulligan mentioned—in promoting the Paralympics and the integration of disabled people into mainstream society in general. The Paralympics has been used to explain disability in every school in Australia and as an educational tool, which goes some way towards explaining the 200,000 school visitors and the significant media coverage. Those are models of good practice in overcoming existing barriers and promoting positive messages that Scotland should want to emulate.
Funding continues to be a crucial issue. We must acknowledge the huge impact of lottery funding and the big difference that it has made to both disabled and abled athletes. However, there are obstacles—mostly bureaucratic—to securing funding, particularly for Paralympians. Funding for an athlete is based on the world-class performance plan, which is generally based on world rankings and performance targets. However, there are no world rankings for disabled athletes, who have few opportunities to compete, so many Paralympians miss out on funding.
The funding structure for Scots Paralympians is especially complicated because of the rather difficult relationship that I understand exists between UK Athletics and Scottish Disability Sport. For example, UK Athletics does not recognise Karen Lewis, the world wheelchair sprint champion over 100 m, as one of the top two athletes in the world at her sport, so she does not receive category A funding.
Mary Mulligan mentioned the resourcing of the transition from identifying young talent to nurturing it to elite standard. When we come across a talented athlete, we must ensure that a promising opportunity is not denied because of a lack of resources such as access to appropriate coaching. Bureaucracy has been a hindrance to that process. UK Athletics used to refuse to recognise the coaches of Scottish Paralympians at Great Britain level, which made it difficult for talented disabled athletes in Scotland to develop their potential, because their coaches were not exposed to international competition.
Increased funding and better communication and co-operation are vital. The funding needs to be increased, but the structures must also be in place to ensure that we meet the needs of the athletes adequately. That will deliver even greater success in Athens.
I welcome Mary Mulligan's motion. I declare a past interest, as I was a consultant for Capability Scotland.
I am pleased to speak in the debate. Members may be aware that I have lodged a slightly different motion to draw attention to local athletes, such as Caroline Innes from Cupar in Fife. She won two gold medals, in the 200 m and 400 m, and a silver medal. She smashed the world record in the 400 m by five seconds.
Other names with which members may be familiar are Janice Lawton, who took the silver in the discus, and Allan Stuart, who took the silver in the 400 m. In cycling, visually impaired Robert Allen and his sighted pilot Andrew Slater took silver in the men's tandem 1 km time trials.
I mention those names, but I make it clear that all members of the UK team who managed to reach Sydney have everything to be proud of. All of them are winners. Indeed, what strikes me is that not only are they marvellous role models for other people with disabilities, but they are marvellous role models irrespective of disability. What a message it sends to young people about what can be achieved through personal dedication.
I will not repeat what has been said by other members—I agree with all of it—but I want to consider similar issues slightly differently. I agree with Irene McGugan's suggestion about a reception—indeed, I have scored out that part of my speech. Local authorities have receptions for achievement in their area. Sending such a successful team is a type of achievement and the Parliament should be able to help. I do not know whether that could take place through a committee or through the Presiding Officer, but the Parliament should consider the idea.
One of the important things about the Paralympics is the way in which it reduces what for many people has been a stigma. People who compete are mentioned by name. When they are introduced, it is about the person and their achievement, not their disability—that comes later. That is a difference which we should applaud.
It has been mentioned that the Paralympics comes every four years. While I am aware that there are world championships in many of the sports in the Paralympics, some consideration should be given to extending opportunities for sportsmen and women to take part in their sport, by introducing an equivalent in the Commonwealth or European games.
I also wish to discuss the role of the media. Although The Daily Telegraph did its job on the Paralympics—it is my daily bible, and I read about all the achievements in it—I was disappointed that the Scottish papers did not have a journalist in Sydney to cover the games. I suggest that, although the Paralympics may not be an event to which all the papers might send journalists, they at least should consider a pooled approach to improve Scottish coverage.
Finally, I wish to touch on the issue of lottery funding. I am particularly concerned about the funding for coaching. I have previously spoken about the ending of the millennium fund as a source of money. Given that the millennium fund has not been split up equally among charities, sport, culture and heritage, I hope that the national opportunities fund will at least reflect the opportunities to fund the coaching of people with disabilities and their attendance at games such as the Paralympics.
It is with pleasure that I give my and my parliamentary group's support to Mary Mulligan's motion, and I welcome the fact that she lodged it.
As members have said, we have witnessed in recent weeks the achievements of Olympians and Paralympians and have been inspired not only by the competitors from Scotland but by those from all over the world.
I saw only a small amount of the coverage of the Olympics and Paralympics, but the events that I saw on the screen provided examples of the indomitability of the human spirit, and of the resilience of the human mind and body.
A few days ago, I saw an item on the news about a competitor—I believe that her name was Ann Woffinden—who was competing in a new sport that I had never seen before, boccia, a specially adapted form of bowls. She spoke movingly and impressively about the problems associated with maintaining her programme of competitive training and practice, and about the difficulty of obtaining financial support between competitions. As she was speaking, she won viewers' admiration not just for her skill in her sport, but for her strong sense of self-worth and her determination to succeed. That is an example to every one of us.
The Paralympic team must now be seen as equivalent to our Olympic team. We should back those people in that regard. I will not go over the stuff about finance, as I totally agree with what has already been said.
Other members have spoken about the importance of breaking down barriers. Many of the Scottish competitors have not only reached levels of outstanding sporting achievement, but have done so while leading ordinary lives, which may have involved bringing up families, working, studying and so on. The competitors' performances were no doubt satisfying and life enhancing for them; they were also satisfying and life enhancing for us, and for the kind of Scotland that we want to create.
Yesterday, I was looking at the Scottish Parliament Christmas card featuring a painting by Victoria Crowe. Inside the card, it says that
"this picture was selected from an exhibition . . . at the Scottish National Portrait Gallery . . . to celebrate heroism of everyday life in Scotland, one in which everyone matters."
Perhaps nobody would want to go down the old communist route of handing out hundreds of medals to heroes of the Soviet Union, but I raise an idea that the Parliament might like to consider. Would it be possible for us to institute a series of awards for individuals such as our Paralympians—this would not be confined to disability issues, nor to sport—whereby we as a Parliament recognised the life-enhancing examples of Scots whose achievements we wanted to celebrate?
Perhaps each month, MSPs or the Parliament could somehow nominate two or three individuals to receive particular attention and recognition, whose citations would be placed on the parliamentary record and who would be given a token of our admiration.
I was lying in my bed this morning, trying to think of a title—I thought of "Spirit Scotland" or "Spirit of Scotland", but—
That is whisky.
I know. That is why I decided against that. I eventually thought that we could have a series of awards known as the Scottish Parliament "Inspiring Scotland" awards. I hope that I will have time to work up that idea in the form of a motion.
In that way, we could celebrate the achievements of ordinary Scots who had proved to be extraordinary and who had inspired us by their example and improved our lives and Scottish life. The Paralympians would be high on my list for such an award.
I stayed at the debate because although I do not like sport and do not normally watch it, I saw the Paralympics as my television was on unintentionally. I was doing parliamentary work at the time and I stopped doing it because I was drawn to what seemed to me the old-fashioned spirit of the Olympics—I watched those competitors working hard to win but also glad to be competing, and saw the real team spirit among them. I became intrigued. I watched the lady to whom Ian Jenkins referred. I also watched a programme about the Olympic village where for once disabled people were in the majority and were delighted to find themselves "normal"—whatever that odd word means.
Therefore, I am very pleased that the motion was lodged, and I am ashamed that I had not previously paid attention to the Paralympics. Sydney has done it proud. It was right to bring it so far up the agenda and to draw it to the attention of people like me who are usually hostile to sport. That is for several reasons—I was no good at it, but also it seems so often that commercialism has taken over. I felt that the true spirit of sport was reinstated by the Paralympians. I also thought that for once taking part was very important, just as winning was.
That is why I wanted to speak in the debate. The suggestions that have been made should be considered by Parliament, particularly that of an award or ceremony for the Paralympians, because they certainly enlightened me. I may even watch sport again now.
We have time for one more—I hope brief—contribution.
I have been caught on the hop. To speak from personal experience, when people become disabled, as Dr Simpson knows, they often enter a black hole of depression. Mary Mulligan rightly referred to self-esteem. Sport is one way of making people feel proud of themselves. It is not necessary to win a medal, but to achieve something in sport or exercise can help people to get over their disablement. I have seen that myself and I know how incredibly effective it is. Swimming and the things that the Chest, Heart and Stroke Association organises are all very important.
Ian Jenkins's idea of awards is very forward looking. I have long felt that we should not wait for Her Majesty to dish out OBEs and so on if there is something constructive that we ourselves can do.
Why do we not have a disabled aspect to Highland games and other such events? Let us make disabled people feel that they count and that they have something to be proud of. That raising of morale and of self-esteem can lead to greater healing of the disability—I have seen that.
Because Mr Stone was so brief, there is about a minute left for Mr Gorrie to make a contribution.
Thank you.
Members who have spoken so far have covered the issues well. We must develop mass participation in sport for the whole country. The amount of participation has gone down. Some things have been done to try to put that right, but we need to put more effort into sport for all—disabled, non-disabled, and for young people in particular—with a huge payback if we achieve results.
Does Mr Gorrie agree that we should consider the Paralympians being sponsored to be involved in schools, so that they can demonstrate that people with disabilities are just as able to participate in sport? That would, as he suggests, encourage everybody to participate in sport.
Yes.
That is an unusual end to the open part of the debate.
This is the first members' debate that I have had the good fortune to take part in. It has been a particularly pleasurable experience because of the way in which the debate has been conducted and because of the cross-party support for the issues that are before us. I congratulate Mary Mulligan on choosing this subject, which not only is fresh in our minds given what we have seen, but is of an importance that has not been realised by the nation in general.
I have had the opportunity in this Parliament to congratulate our Olympians who took part in the prelude games to the Paralympics. This debate allows me to convey on behalf of the Executive my warmest congratulations to everyone who took part in Team GB from all parts of this country. As always, the Scots athletes in the GB team did particularly well, and I send to them my special and hearty congratulations.
Sandra White said that she does not normally watch sport. I am sorry; I meant Christine Grahame. Please forgive me.
You are forgiven.
Age and the booze have wrecked my memory.
Same as me.
We will get on well together.
See me later.
There is an offer. Can we refuse?
I am glad that Christine Grahame is thinking about watching sport, because it is a wonderful pastime for everyone, even though we cannot necessarily take part. I have difficulty taking part myself, but I still get wonderful pleasure from watching. It is not just about the pleasure of winning or losing, but about the pleasure of watching people take part, which is the point that Christine made. I hope that we will always remember that the important part of sport is taking part. Winning can be important for others. We in the Parliament and the Scottish Executive must ensure that those who have skills and abilities realise them to their full potential, and that we have methods in place for them to do so. However, it is the taking part that is really important.
The great things about the Paralympics are the fact that everyone can take part at the highest level and the effect that they have on the self-esteem and development of the individuals who take part. However, not only the participants benefit; we all benefit from watching excellence, whatever our background. That can lead us all to take part. I am often asked whether there is a conflict between elitism and just getting folk to take part. There is not, because it is a virtuous circle. When individuals do well, the profile of the sport is raised, others take part and we spread the base of the sport, the base develops, others do well, and it goes on and on to produce all the benefits.
The Paralympics are of great significance, and all those who took part in the Sydney Olympics are to be congratulated. It is also correct for me to thank Australia, all its people and all who were involved, particularly when the games are compared with those in Atlanta.
I watched the Sydney games on television, and was impressed by the numbers that were there. I was impressed by the basketball in particular. My goodness, was that not a vicious sport? I also thought that the other funny game where they went between goals and knocked one another was quite exceptional. Thank goodness I do not play that any more. Everyone is to be congratulated.
We heard from Irene McGugan—I got the name right, did I not?—pertinent questions about funding. She is right. There was a problem with the world-class performance programme and the relationship between UK Athletics and the body in Scotland that is involved in this issue. Government has no locus to interfere in disputes between governing bodies, but as always, as I said at the Education, Culture and Sport Committee, ministers
"can let them feel the heat of the minister's breath on their collar".—[Official Report, Education, Culture and Sport Committee, 30 October 2000; c 1817.]
As a result of pressure from sportscotland emphasising the importance of communications involvement for Scottish athletes and their coaches, UK Athletics appointed Bill Walker, a Scot, to the coaching staff for the Sydney games. I hope that there is a closer relationship and that the problem will be lessened as Scottish Disability Sport is now directly involved in the development and monitoring of the world-class performance programmes for athletes with disability.
All Scottish Paralympians were funded by the world-class performance programme, run by UK Sport, for which it has a fixed amount of money, to which we make some contributions. That programme is based on ability. In Scotland, to deal with those with disability there is a talented athletes programme, through which a large number of athletes are funded. We also have various other performance coaching programmes, including Royal Mail's ready, willing and able programme, Sportability Scotland and the BP Amoco tourfest. We use our money in Scotland directly on all those programmes to promote sport for those with disability.
The Scottish Institute of Sport funds and develops talented athletes. It has about 120 athletes in its excellence programme, which is for elite athletes, of which 10 or 11 are people with disabilities. They are recognised in that programme. We have taken this forward. We have not yet achieved all that we should achieve. I would be grateful for suggestions about other ways in which we could take this forward together.
Finally, on the making of awards, I am against any more gongs being handed out—there are enough of them going around. It is for the Parliament to decide what awards it might be willing to make and whether it wants to have any receptions. I can announce that the Executive will host a reception for all Olympians and Paralympians to recognise their outstanding achievements.
I am more interested in people taking part than necessarily doing well, but when they do well, that is something that we recognise. It enhances our status, enhances the profile of the nation and gets the rest of us into sport. It has even encouraged some of us couch potatoes to watch sport.
I hope that this Parliament can agree on the outstanding success of the Scottish Paralympians and Olympians and on the way forward. We will continue to support and develop people with disabilities in sport.
Meeting closed at 17:42.