Scottish Mini-Olympics
The final item of business is a members' business debate on motion S2M-2516, in the name of Robert Brown, on the Scottish mini-Olympics. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes Glasgow's poor health record, including high rates of coronary heart disease and stroke; welcomes initiatives to increase physical exercise, including the active school programme, the commitment to ensure two hours of physical education (PE) for schoolchildren every week and the new network of sports facilities across Scotland; believes that developing a competitive spirit in schools and sports clubs and encouraging young people to have a desire to win, whilst concentrating on self-improvement, is central to sporting endeavour; further believes that it is the role of government to provide opportunities for everyone to be physically active for life from a young age; considers that the Scottish Executive, sportscotland, local authorities and other interested organisations should promote sporting competition by establishing a biannual Scottish mini-Olympics for young people at school in which 32 teams, one from every local authority area, would compete against each other in various Olympic-style events, such as track and field and swimming; further considers that Scotland's towns and cities could bid for the right to host the Scottish mini-Olympics every two years, whilst allowing Glasgow to be the first host; further considers that local businesses and community leaders could back their local team at these mini-Olympics through local hero bursary schemes and general support, and believes that bringing back retired PE teachers could help in the training of young Scots in sport, particularly in the run-up to the proposed mini-Olympics.
A couple of months ago, Careers Scotland completed a significant piece of research. In essence, it identified that young people who had an aim in life—who had some idea of where they are going and who had set themselves goals—were likely to realise higher levels of attainment than young people of similar intelligence and abilities who had no such aim. To an extent, that is sheer common sense—we all instinctively recognise it to be true—but nevertheless the connection is important.
Most of us in the Parliament have made visits to schools and youth organisations and have met some inspirational young people. Equally, most of us have visited projects that try to build confidence and skills in young people who are in a state of drift. As a society, there is much at stake in our being able to realise the full potential of our young people; that is true for those young people and for our communities at large.
One subject—sport—motivates young people beyond all others. Last night's football results, the performance of the goal-scoring hero of the moment, the deficiencies of the referee and the painful failures of the national teams are all the subject of agonised debate in playgrounds and on school buses and street corners. It is not just watching sport that motivates young people. Any morning, in the playground of the school next door to the Parliament, or in any school the length and breadth of the land, children are playing with balls and engaging with each other in a way that crosses divisions of colour, class or creed and which gets the blood stirring. Motivation in sport is not a million miles removed from motivation in enterprise, which is important to our national future.
My proposition to the chamber is that the potential of sport is possibly the greatest motivating force in Scotland. It gives young people the opportunity of physical exercise and offers them goals—in several senses of the word—and the energy to participate more fully in other activities.
I have a confession to make. When I was at school, sport and I were virtual strangers. Our gym teacher, who favoured a red Arnhem-type beret, sent us out on character-building cross-country runs where soggy gym shoes and muddy tracks through damp woods were the order of the day. I normally came second last. If it was not politically incorrect to say so, I would mention that I came only just ahead of the fat boy in the class.
The horror of my life was the dreadful business of attempting to pull myself up on the horizontal bar—a feat that, as far as I can recall, and I presume because of some physical deficiency, I was never able to perform. At university, I reached the dizzy height of being the second and unused substitute for the third and lowliest university basketball team. After that, I more or less retired from sport. I mention all that not as an exercise in self-humiliation but to make the point that the development of sport must offer a wide choice of options that can interest not just the high fliers in the popular team games, but the broad spectrum of youngsters with varied abilities.
Above all, sport provides role models for young people. Whether they be football or rugby stars, athletics champions, round-the-world yachtspersons or snowboarding champions, those gladiators of sport are admired and emulated by young people. I remember when, some years ago, the world bowling championships came to Glasgow. It was the talk of the steamie and on the television. Although bowling had been seen very much as a game for older men, it attracted a remarkable number of new, young enthusiasts.
The central idea in tonight's debate is that we should create a biennial Scottish mini-Olympics for young people at school, in which 32 teams—one from every local authority area in Scotland—would compete against one another in a broad range of sports such as swimming, track events, running and team games. We can build on the national competitions that already take place in individual sports, but the Olympic idea would make it something more exciting. It has been done elsewhere. Australia, for example, attracts 1,400 young athletes to its biennial Australian youth Olympic festival—and Australia is hardly unknown in the world of adult sporting endeavour. I think that there is a connection there.
It will not surprise members to hear that I think it would be appropriate for Glasgow to be the first host city. Glasgow is Scotland's biggest city, but it is also the city with the worst concentrations of poor health, deprivation and underachievement. However, it is also a city with a great sporting heritage. It has three major football stadia—and others that belong to teams that a number of other people support—and a tradition of running big events. Glasgow would be the ideal place to start.
I believe that the mini-Olympics idea has great potential. Behind it lie many key themes—the importance of self-improvement; the building of confidence and skills; the encouragement of more physical exercise among young people; the contribution of good role models; and the need to involve the wider community.
The support of mums and dads provides a captive and enthusiastic, not to say highly partisan, crowd. Local businesses could support their local teams at the mini-Olympics through, for example, bursary schemes. There would need to be committed and professional support for the sporting aspects. Perhaps retired physical education teachers could provide a new and committed resource to help in the training of young Scots in sport; or perhaps we could harness enthusiastic young people at our universities and colleges. There is an example of that sort of thing at the University of Strathclyde, which has a summer event at Jordanhill for fourth-year pupils, giving them a range of interesting activities to do.
We have to speak with one voice. Last year in the United Kingdom, 807 applications for the development of playing fields were approved. No doubt, there were all sorts of good reasons for that in many cases. However, put together, the picture is not altogether one of state support for sport. We must not be tempted into selling off our family silver because big supermarket chains or housing developments offer a high price.
The import of too many overpaid football stars from abroad by our leading football teams is extraordinarily short-sighted and destructive of native talent. Let us look instead to remove the barriers that stop young people, from all our communities, from realising their sporting and individual potential.
Of course, there will be no vote at the end of this evening's debate and no formal decision will be taken. However, I hope that when Patricia Ferguson responds to the debate she will be prepared to commit the Scottish Executive to look seriously at this idea, which has already attracted wide cross-party support. I hope that the Executive will engage with local authorities, sportscotland and other interested groups and turn the idea into a worthwhile and visionary reality. I believe that it could work significant good for Scotland. I shall be very interested to hear the views and detailed suggestions of colleagues during the debate.
I am confused by the motion. Like Robert Brown, I was never very good at school sports. It was not that I was unenthusiastic; I just had to face the fact that I was not very good at them. The Olympic movement is all about sporting excellence and elite sporting achievement, whereas the active schools programme, which is mentioned in the motion and which I very much support, is about encouraging enthusiasm and participation in physical activity.
At this point, I must say that I attended an inspiring presentation on the active schools programme at last week's meeting of the cross-party group on sport. The programme is trying to build a base that will last a lifetime. There is a big difference between focusing on sports participation and focusing on sporting excellence. The mini-Olympics might well be worth while, but it will provide an elite competitive sporting opportunity for the few who are selected for the 32 teams instead of encouraging participation for all in sport and in what Robert Brown described as a wide range of options and a broad spectrum of activities. I would far prefer to support initiatives such as the active schools programme and encourage everyone's participation in sport, no matter whether their skill level is the same as mine or the same as the sporting heroes whom we will no doubt celebrate in the debate.
The money and resources that would be allocated to the mini-Olympics would inevitably be funnelled into training only a select group of young people for success. That is completely at odds with encouraging general physical activity, which is what we should be aiming towards. Only through having wider and more diverse opportunities will all children and young people be able to participate in a way that suits them. Of course, giving a broader base of active children and young people such diverse opportunities will enable us to spot and promote the most talented ones. However, I see a contradiction between some of the aspects that Robert Brown highlighted and his overall solution.
The active schools programme is doing a great job in encouraging people to volunteer and participate. However, it has not yet gone live in all 32 Scottish local authorities and I would like more effort to be made in that respect by the Scottish Executive and sportscotland, which I must say is doing a great job in promoting such initiatives instead of schemes such as the mini-Olympiad. Robert Brown was correct to say that competitions already exist for young people, but I worry that the mini-Olympiad would simply replicate a lot of that work.
As I have said, we should concentrate on encouraging sport for all and participation by everyone. We must also focus our attention on the kind of informal and semi-formal play spaces where on Sunday mornings I play football with my mates with a hangover and—I must admit—a very low level of excellence. We simply enjoy getting out there, being active and playing a bit of football. Instead of always focusing on excellence, elite sports and proposals such as the mini-Olympiad, we must open up opportunities by retaining those playing fields and supporting their use.
Although I agree with many of Robert Brown's points, I am unsure whether his prescription will lead to the wide choice of options and the broad spectrum of activities that he mentioned. Our message and ethos should be sport for all and active schools for everyone rather than for elite athletes alone.
I have to say that I was quite good at school sports. Indeed, I got my colours in three different sports—although I cannot remember now what they were.
Robert Brown is right to say that sportspeople can be role models. For example, I am absolutely certain that I would not be standing here today or have stayed on the straight path had it not been for Eleanor Gordon, who won a bronze medal for swimming at the 1952 Helsinki Olympics. Although I was a very wee girl at the time, I was a member of the same swimming club and have admired what she did all my life. I was a swimmer when I was young and, as swimming has kept me going through physical difficulties in my later life, I most certainly advocate sport for all and activity at a level that suits everyone.
I must take issue with Mark Ballard. It is not true to say that general activity is just as good as organised sport; they are two different concepts and the same people can take part in a wide range of physical activities. Nonetheless, I will address myself to the motion and not give him a lecture on that now, although I am an old PE teacher.
I have great sympathy with what Robert Brown intends and congratulate him on securing the debate, but I take issue with some of the details of his proposal, just as Mark Ballard did. The motion puts the cart before the horse. Elsewhere, Robert Brown has referred to the fact that the number of PE teachers in Scotland will be increased by 400. I sincerely hope that that will happen, but if he can show me where those teachers are being trained right now I will be a bit more hopeful that his plan could be put into effect before today's schoolchildren are the age that I am now and are looking back fondly on the 2004 Olympics. The Executive has recognised that extra PE teachers are needed, but PE must become central to the curriculum; it must not be a fringe or a frill. The Executive will not achieve its desired levels of health improvement without PE—encompassing health education—being at the core of the timetable and infused throughout the school curriculum. Without that happening, the Executive will simply not hit its health targets.
We cannot glibly say that we will have mini-Olympics because we will have 400 more PE teachers, as we do not know for certain that we will have extra PE teachers. Robert Brown suggested bringing retired PE teachers out of retirement to coach. I advocated that for some time until a lot of them got in touch with me and said, "Right, you can do it, china." PE teachers have often—certainly in the past 10 years—been glad to retire because of discipline problems in school, so we cannot glibly accept that bringing them out of retirement is a good idea. It is a good idea, but a lot of work would have to go into working out how it could come about.
The mini-Olympics would depend on competition, as Mark Ballard pointed out. Competition in schools is patchy, because there is still a generation of teachers who think that competition is bad for the pupils. I happen not to share that belief. Part of school education should be about learning to win and lose with equal grace, but that idea has not been fashionable until very recently. We need a programme to change attitudes among classroom teachers and enable them to learn how to coach and train PE.
The mini-Olympics proposal could reinvent the wheel. We could use existing local authority structures and have the old type of county sports competition, for example. That is the way that I would start, because a mini-Olympics would create the wrong idea. It is a wee bit patronising and we need to have serious competition so that the kids feel that it is worth while.
I suggest that Robert Brown talk to me afterwards about the OneCity Trust in Edinburgh and its work in bringing business and local sports clubs together. I also suggest that he examine what James Gillespie's High School in Edinburgh is doing with pupil and teacher exchanges. The particular exchange that I am thinking of is with South Africa. To tell children that they are going somewhere nice and warm with the school if they reach a certain standard in athletics is a better carrot to get them out training on a cold winter night than a mini-Olympics would be.
I am sorry that I cannot go on and on, because sport is my passion, but I thank Robert Brown for bringing the idea of a mini-Olympics to the Parliament's attention.
I congratulate Robert Brown on securing the debate. We all agree that sport in schools has potential benefits for physical, mental and social well-being in our society as a whole. One of the key points about promoting sport and physical activity in schools is that, if we get people actively involved in physical pursuits—sport and otherwise—at a young age, they will, we hope, carry on that activity in later life and the health benefits that we generate in our young will continue as they get older.
I disagree with Mark Ballard's view that a mini-Olympics would be an elitist event, because the Olympic ideal is inclusion and participation, which I think any type of competition should involve. However, I understand where he is coming from in his concerns that a mini-Olympics might be portrayed as an elitist event.
Does the member acknowledge that only a tiny minority of Scotland's schoolchildren could ever hope to participate in the mini-Olympiad?
I understand what the member is saying, but I want to pursue the point, because the idea of a mini-Olympics is not new in Scotland. Last year, the SNP-led Falkirk Council introduced its mini-Olympics for schools in the area. Some 1,800 primary 7 school kids from across the district participated in the event at Grangemouth stadium, which included a range of events such as track and field, football and swimming. The event was highly successful and the children really enjoyed it. It was organised in conjunction with local and national businesses and the local authority. One of the things that I found particularly impressive was that the marshalling and refereeing was carried out by senior pupils from the high schools to which the primary 7 kids would move on after the summer holidays. I know that Falkirk Council is looking to roll out the event in the years to come. It was not elitist; it was very much about inclusion and participation.
The culture has existed for some time that we should try to remove competition from some of the sporting activities that take place in schools. I do not think that that is necessarily healthy; I believe that competition has an important part to play, but it should not serve to exclude children who do not wish to participate in the competitive aspects of sport. We must strike a balance.
I am not necessarily convinced that we should have a biennial national mini-Olympics in Scotland. Much more important—Margo MacDonald touched on this—is engagement between community sports clubs and schools. It is unfortunate that in Scotland being a member of a sports club is fairly unusual, whereas in Scandinavian countries it is normal—on average, more than 70 per cent of Swedish kids are members of some kind of community sports club. It is important that kids be involved in community sports clubs because, once they move on from school, the clubs will give them the necessary expert advice and support if they want to compete at a higher level.
One of the main difficulties that people have is access to the right type of facilities. Members have highlighted before the problems that people encounter with public-private partnership schools. Falkirk's women's hockey team had to go to Linlithgow because its members could not afford to pay the charges to use the park at Graeme High School. We must ensure that, when we provide facilities, they are affordable to community sports clubs. I hope that when children get involved with those clubs at school, they will go on to be members and to participate in sports much more effectively. That is the approach that we should take. There is a role for competition, but it should not exclude kids who do not want to participate in competitive sports.
I am grateful to Robert Brown for bringing the debate to the chamber, because there are a number of serious issues involved. First, the motion highlights Glasgow's poor health record. There can be no doubt whatever that lack of physical activity is a major contributory factor in the incidence of coronary heart disease and stroke. Although I accept that there are other causes, such as over-smoking and over-drinking, lack of physical activity is a real problem. From that perspective, Robert Brown is totally correct to bring the issue to the Parliament, although I do not know whether the idea of a mini-Olympics is a runner in the longer term.
There were a number of inaccuracies in what Robert Brown said. First, he stated that when we pass school playgrounds, we see kids kicking a ball around. With respect, that is not what happens nowadays, certainly compared with the days when he and I were of an age to kick a ball around a playground. Youngsters nowadays are less involved in physical activity, so any idea that can be advanced to encourage such activity is worth while. He also referred to the fact that there are three major football stadia in Glasgow. Mr Matheson, Ms Ferguson and I are all regular visitors to Firhill Park and we are wondering where the other two are.
Robert Brown was correct to underline the fact that one of the major problems with Scottish sport—and Scottish football in particular—has been the way in which some clubs have imported overpaid, glamorous stars from abroad. That approach has not worked and Partick Thistle has been resolute in resisting the temptation to take that route, which must hang to the wall for the moment.
There are serious issues to be addressed. Michael Matheson rightly highlighted the fact that a non-competitive culture has been introduced into many aspects of life in Scotland during the past 10 years or so. Frankly, I think that that is unfortunate. Of course, there are problems with over-competitiveness. Sectarianism is a problem and one aspect of football hooliganism is the tribalism that the win-at-all-costs philosophy brings about. I recognise those dangers, but in every game, and in every activity in life, some people will win and some will lose. Although we must always ensure that those who lose do not feel terribly bad about it, and although we must put support mechanisms in place—again, as a Partick Thistle supporter, I can empathise—there is nothing wrong with a degree of healthy competition, provided that it is not taken too seriously.
In this morning's debate on early-years education, I underlined my regret about the way in which things have become over-complicated in recent times, which has resulted in a reduction in voluntary sector input into all aspects of sport and education. Robert Brown's idea about retired PE teachers has some merits, but I suggest that if we encourage the voluntary sector more we will see the results that we are all anxious to achieve. It does not seem all that long ago that many people, including people in some of Scotland's poorest areas, ran football teams. Nowadays, that does not happen to the same extent. In the education system, teachers do not give up their time so willingly to take the school football team, rugby team or whatever on a Saturday morning. That is to be regretted.
I am not sure whether Robert Brown's ideas will work, but they are worth considering. I was amused at his all-his-yesterdays approach in the earlier part of his speech, but he can perhaps comfort himself with the fact that, although he went through a lot of grief during the terrible times in which he was at school and university, that may at least have been character building. After all, he is a Liberal.
This debate has served a useful purpose in that members have made a number of helpful and constructive remarks. I take issue with Mark Ballard, who used a flawed approach that politicians tend to use, whereby they put up one thing against another when it is perfectly easy to have both. The idea that we must have either mass participation or a competition between teams from different councils is a load of rubbish. One leads to the other.
I think that Mark Ballard missed what seems to me to be the subtlety of Robert Brown's motion. Competition is a good thing and Robert Brown's proposal would create competition between councils. Councils, especially those that have failed dismally to promote sport in their areas, will not like their kids being massacred by all and sundry. They will pull their finger out—if that is a parliamentary expression—and improve their performance by giving their children more scope. Competition is good for those who can compete and mass participation is good for everyone. We can have both and one leads to the other.
We must have ambition for those who wish to progress. There are ways in which to encourage councils to improve their performance. For example, charges for using sports premises are often so high that kids cannot participate. Councils could reduce charges as part of developing their teams for the contest.
As for coaches, we can bring together PE teachers past and present who teach after school hours with club coaches to use school premises or other premises. The key to developing a sport and the young people is a good coach who knows something about the subject—not a fanatical parent who swears at the young people from the touchline, but someone who is serious and is reasonably knowledgeable about coaching.
We could also do more to develop really young coaches—young professionals who are still performing. There are one or two good schemes that encourage footballers to coach and to achieve Scottish vocational qualifications, for example. Some of the best coaches were not all that great as players. People can have a modest professional career then do really well in coaching. Developing clubs, coaches and the use of school facilities would greatly help everyone—the elite and the less elite—and Robert Brown's idea would encourage that.
More than one age group should perform. The motion does not say that, but different age groups could be involved. The organisation to which Michael Matheson referred, with which I have had dealings, involves different age groups of performers. That allows for mass participation.
The matter is irrelevant in a sense, but we could build on the Glasgow special Olympics this summer and develop interest in that. That is a fruitful idea that we could develop.
I want to ensure that members know that the BAA games that are based at Meadowbank in Edinburgh offer the sort of event that the motion proposes, so a prototype exists. What is interesting is the number of local authorities that do not enter a team. The games combine mass participation with genuine competition. They are a good prototype that I urge members to examine.
I agree. I handed out medals at that good event a year or two ago. The idea in the motion is not totally new; Robert Brown is building on existing activities.
Above all, we must put sport on the top table politically. I have great hopes of the minister—I am not oozing up to her.
Why not?
Well, why not? The minister has sufficient political clout to have sport taken seriously. Whether at the United Kingdom or the Scottish level, sport has not ranked with other major political issues such as education, health and transport, but it should.
People care about sport. As Robert Brown and others have said, it motivates young people especially. We can hit many buttons by developing sport more. I hope that those of us who are enthusiastic about sport—even if we disagree about some of the small print—can push the idea in the motion and other ideas to put sport higher up the political agenda, with some money and with moral and personal support.
I confess that I was good at sport. Perhaps there is a gender issue; the women who have contributed to the debate participated in sport at a reasonable level. I was a sprinter and I played netball. I was lucky enough to play on a sprung wooden floor, which meant that when, in later life, I won a Scottish universities cup medal for netball, I had a rather large spring for somebody who was small compared with her competitors.
I also played hockey. We have heard recently about the old racecourse in Ayr, where I played hockey. That is another playing field that is under threat because of a public-private partnership expansion of a local school. I understand that—luckily—the old racecourse has had a reprieve. Government policy has a serious conflict with our aspiration to encourage more pupils to participate. On PPP, I was alarmed to hear in the recent debate on free school meals about schools where the dinner hall is doubling up as a gym hall. It takes time after lunch to clean up squished potato and so on—valuable time that could be used for PE. That issue must be addressed.
Some good points have been made in the debate. I want to reflect on the mini-Olympics concept, which is about participation. Michael Matheson gave a good example from Falkirk Council. An event involving 1,800 pupils is not elitist. For pupils to qualify for a Scotland-wide competition, provision would have to be made for them to compete in local areas. I am pleased that in my home town there is a cluster of schools that does that on a regular basis. It is also important that primary school pupils should mix with secondary school pupils.
We must ensure that we have the coaches and teachers who are needed. The minister may want to work with her Cabinet colleagues to ensure that we have those people in place. Unfortunately, in answer to a parliamentary question from my colleague Michael Matheson in February this year, Jim Wallace pointed out that the number of people who are graduating in PE went down in 2002-03, compared with the previous year. As Margo MacDonald said, there is a commitment to provide 400 PE teachers, but I am not sure where they are, where the capacity to train them is, and whether they will come through in time.
In Scotland, we send our pupils to school for longer than most other developed countries do, but we are ranked 27th out of 29 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries for the time that pupils spend on PE. That is very serious when combined with the concerns about health that were mentioned earlier. Healthy bodies mean healthy minds. PE brings respect for one's body and oneself—a point that has not been made in the debate, but which is very important, for hormonal teenagers in particular. We should capture that point, which tends to be lost in the debate about nutrition, health and fitness.
We should examine the shape of the school day. There are some interesting examples from overseas that we should consider. The French structure the school day to allow the sort of community participation in schools about which Michael Matheson spoke. We need to be creative and innovative, but we also need to ensure that we have the basics right. That means having the necessary playing fields, gym halls and teachers, and, as Donald Gorrie said, having the political will and support to drive sport up the political agenda, to ensure that we can make a difference. That difference would be valuable—not just to the individuals concerned, but to society in general. I am pleased to have been able to participate in the debate.
Like other members who have spoken this evening, I congratulate Robert Brown on securing parliamentary time for us to have this debate.
The concept of a mini-Olympics is fairly novel. I note the example that Michael Matheson gave, but the idea of a Scotland-wide event is novel. However, I welcome any initiative that would promote interest and participation in sport and increase levels of physical activity among our young people. As Michael Matheson rightly pointed out, a mini-Olympics could provide opportunities for volunteering and encourage people who cannot compete to become informed spectators.
Recently I attended the Scottish final of the Norwich Union sports:hall programme in Dundee. The event involved girls and boys in under-13 and under-15 categories, representing teams from as far apart as Shetland and Dumfries and Galloway. The young people took part in events such as speed bounce, standing long jump and the vertical jump.
What impressed me most about the event was the enthusiasm of the young people who took part and the fact they were having great fun into the bargain. The initiative does not require expensive facilities or equipment; it demands only the imaginative use of facilities and a commitment to giving young people opportunities to express themselves and to test their skills in a variety of sports activities. It also offers opportunities for stimulating interest in sport, while providing a structure for developing skills through competition at regional, Scottish and UK level. What seemed like an ever-growing procession of young people who had taken part gained medals in the course of the day, about which they were very pleased, and the winning team went forward to the UK finals. I sincerely encourage Robert Brown and other colleagues with an interest in sport to investigate that model.
I fully accept that we need to offer a wide range of opportunities to young people if we are to improve health and fitness in Scotland, but we have to encourage participation so that we can then develop successful athletes.
Although I fully support the sentiments behind the motion, I admit to having some slight reservations about the commitment of resources and staff time that would be required to plan, organise and stage such events, as well as the distraction that might be involved in a bidding process.
Opportunities for young people to engage competitively already exist. I mentioned the sports:hall initiative, but individual sports governing bodies also have their own regional and national events, and there are the Commonwealth youth games, where our young athletes are able to test themselves against their peers from around the Commonwealth. I pay tribute again to the members of the Scottish team who were so successful at Bendigo last December. They are tremendous ambassadors for our country and I am sure that their experience will stand them in good stead for their future sporting careers. I sincerely hope that a number of them will go on to represent their country at the Commonwealth games in Melbourne next year. Some of our young competitors played bowls, which was mentioned as a sport that might not be of interest to young people, but we did very well and won a number of medals in the bowls events.
Fundamentally, we must address the increasing problem of the sedentary lifestyle that is particularly prevalent among our young people. Improving physical activity levels brings health benefits that address the full range of serious health problems that we have in Scotland, including coronary heart disease, stroke and the rising epidemic of obesity. I have discussed that problem with my counterparts in Victoria, Australia, who are also working to address a problem that they only too readily recognise as being prevalent in their country, despite their reputation as a great sporting nation.
By encouraging more people to be more active more often, we hope to encourage participation levels and ultimately to produce more sports stars. However, that will take time and commitment, not just from young people, but from teachers, youth leaders, parents, sports clubs and national and local politicians.
Michael Matheson rightly mentioned an area that concerns me too—the need to form stronger links between schools and clubs, so that young people's participation in sport can lead to a lifetime commitment to their sport once they leave school.
The active schools programme is an important part of the strategy, but we must also commit to increasing the level and quality of physical education. Both Margo MacDonald and Fiona Hyslop mentioned our commitment to providing an additional 400 PE teachers to enable schools to deliver at least two hours of quality physical education every week for every school pupil. I advise Fiona Hyslop that the early indications are quite good. In fact, the University of Strathclyde has increased its intake of PE students this year from nine to 27. Later this year, the University of Edinburgh expects to take on an additional 15 to 20 people, whom it will train in a similar fashion.
Although I am extremely glad to hear those figures, I point out that in Edinburgh in particular there has been a tendency for people who opt for a PE degree to go into sports science rather than into teaching PE. The big requirement is to get people who can demonstrate sports and be active in schools, not sports scientists.
I sympathise entirely with and take on board Margo MacDonald's point. In the context of something that Margo MacDonald said in her speech, I was going to mention the fact that the University of Strathclyde, in conjunction with Glasgow City Council, is currently running a course for existing primary teachers to give them some PE training and allow them to become more skilled so that they can contribute to the life of their primary school. That is useful.
Does that mean that the target of 400 additional PE teachers might include existing primary school teachers who have PE expertise?
Our target is to have 400 PE teachers, but we are also considering as many innovative ways as possible of increasing the number of people in our schools who have some expertise and who can assist in the promotion of physical activity and PE in our schools. In that context, we should remember that, for many young women, dance offers a more attractive way of being physically active than does sport—despite the sporting achievements of Margo MacDonald and Fiona Hyslop when they were younger.
Securing a teaching base is only one change that we need to achieve. Most important, we need to ensure that there is adequate space for physical education in the school week, which touches on a point that Fiona Hyslop made. A curriculum review programme board has been established and will review existing arrangements and make recommendations.
It is essential that we instil positive, healthy attitudes to exercise in our young people when they are at an early age, which we hope will encourage them to be physically active throughout their life. Some young people might go on to become high achievers in sport, but participation matters first and foremost. Donald Gorrie was correct to identify the importance of coaching. Like me, he supports and encourages people who want to take part in the sports leaders programme.
As members said, competition is an integral part of sport. Competition exists in all walks of life and we should not shy away from allowing our young people to learn in and from a competitive environment. Winning and losing are part of life's tapestry and competitive sport is part of that process. Some people progress to a higher level in sport but many others do not, and they must not be made to feel that sport is focused only on competition. Taking part is the most important aspect. Nevertheless, we need to ensure that there are clear opportunities for people who have talent to develop their potential to the full.
Sportscotland is working with sports governing bodies to develop coaching and competitive structures, particularly in youth football, golf and rugby, which are leading the way in developing regional arrangements. I encourage all sports governing bodies to organise events to identify and develop the most talented people as part of their development plans.
I cannot let the debate end without paying tribute to the volunteers and others who organise and run events, who make an enormous contribution to sport at all levels. Their contribution is significant and their expertise makes Scotland an attractive location for major sporting events.
The debate has been wide ranging and I have not been able to touch on all the points that members made. However, I very much welcome the debate, not least because it has highlighted the varying views on competitive sport for young people. I am always interested in hearing about proposals that will improve participation in sport and, although I have reservations about the resource implications of establishing a Scottish mini-Olympics, I would be happy to discuss with Robert Brown how the proposal might be taken forward and how we might develop other ideas that would contribute to an aim that I think members of all parties share.
We must bear it in mind that there should be no artificial barriers to participation in a future mini-Olympics or any other event. Such events should contribute clearly to meeting the targets that are set out in the sport 21 strategy and each competitor should be given the support that they need to allow them to perform at their best.
Meeting closed at 17:58.