Writer Neil McLeod says Britain ought to care about quality of life and poverty, not sporting medals
THE Roman satirical poet Juvenal wrote in 100 AD that the largely disenfranchised populace of an empire in decline were kept passive and cared about nothing other than 'bread and circuses', with reference to the practices of providing free wheat to Roman citizens as well as costly circus games.
One would be forgiven for thinking little has changed in two millennia from the decline of the Roman Empire to post-empire Britain, other than that bread and circuses have become bake offs and Olympics.
Just as the patriotic media fervour over Britain’s unprecedented second place finish in the medal table in Rio begins to fade, the celebration of athleticism is replaced by the coverage of cake-making as a sport, with the return of the BBC’s Great British Bake Off treated as a news event.
Just as the patriotic media fervour over Britain’s unprecedented second place finish in the medal table in Rio begins to fade, the celebration of athleticism is replaced by the coverage of cake-making as a sport.
This isn’t to suggest that the achievements of Britain’s athletes (and golfers and horse riders) should be denigrated or ignored, but we do need a sense of perspective lacking in most of the media coverage and an understanding of how the success was attained.
It is the result of two decades of increased funding out of all proportion to the status of these 'elite sports'. It is a premeditated, calculated effort by successive governments to portray a Great Britain of Corinthian, athletic success that supposedly says something about the nation as a whole being successful, in stark contrast to the reality of a country divided in both wealth and health, where participation in sport is decreasing and obesity increasing.
The individual achievements of British Olympians are all very laudable and many of them have compelling and inspiring stories to tell. While the likes of Mo Farah would almost certainly win on ability and dedication regardless of the amount of public funds invested in him, the reality is that for many, particularly in track cycling, swimming and gymnastics, the primary reason for success is money.
Britain finished 36th in the medal table at the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. John Major was justly alarmed that this reflected badly on the status and the health of the country as a whole.
Thus began a concerted programme of Lottery and government funding that saw £64m invested for the 2000 Sydney Olympics – a figure that rose to £264m for Rio this year, equating to £3.94m per medal.
The British victories have not, by and large, been contested on a level playing field. The mountains of money thrown at the best coaches, facilities and technology that most other competing countries could only dream of has been the deciding factor.
Sports like track cycling are targeted because they offer opportunities for multiple medals, while other sports like dressage are without competitors from entire continents due to the costs involved.
This isn’t to suggest that the achievements of Britain’s athletes should be denigrated or ignored, but we do need a sense of perspective lacking in most of the media coverage.
There are, of course, many positives to the process of viewing Olympic and Paralympic success as something emblematic and representative of the nation as a whole. The inclusivity of accepting the achievements of immigrants and those with disabilities as heroic symbols of national identity is in itself progressive and has possibly helped alter perceptions within local communities as well as nationally.
Even that great positive can be a doubled-edged sword, however, as it papers over the cracks in society. Mo Farah may be a poster boy, but racism seems more prevalent than ever, as recent figures showing a five-fold increase in race hate crimes after the EU referendum in England and Wales demonstrate.
The success of Paralympians in 2012 was used as a stick to beat Disability Living Allowance claimants with, portraying them as feckless wasters who surely were only lacking in spirit to overcome the odds and achieve what David Weir and other wheelchair users did.
As more disabled people achieve greatness in the upcoming Paralympics, a report last week by the new policy institute found that a quarter of working age disabled people, 2.8 million across the UK, are living in 'deep poverty'.
Its findings also highlighted that almost half of people in the UK living in poverty were either disabled themselves, or lived in a household with a disabled person.
One of the stated legacies of the London Olympics and the Glasgow Commonwealth Games was that participation in sport would be encouraged among the general population. But that hasn’t happened in any host country since records of such things began.
The sports being funded are elite sports, not mass participation sports. There is no real link between Olympic success in the former and increased activity in the latter.
The sports being funded are elite sports, not mass participation sports. There is no real link between Olympic success in the former and increased activity in the latter.
Susan Egelstaff, a former badminton player, wrote in the Herald recently that due to lottery funding she "didn’t have to get a proper job until I was 30, but it has no impact at all on improving activity in the general population".
Figures from after the last Olympics show how little a difference it made on participation. A Youth Sport Trust survey of 1,392 primary schools in 2013/14 found that the average number of minutes children spent taking part in PE in a typical week was 102.
This was down from 126 minutes in the charity's 2009/10 survey. Sport England's latest figures show the number of people over 16 participating in sport at least once a week stood at 15.49 million in April 2015, down from 15.89 million in October 2012, just after the Olympic and Paralympic Games finished, and that 3.9 million young people aged 16 to 25 participated in sport once a week in October 2009, declining to 3.8 million in April 2015.
Sport Scotland has recently revised its budget, decreasing it by £9m, including a £2m cut in funding for sport in schools, colleges and universities. In 2010, £162m of ring-fenced funding for the national School Sport Partnerships (SSPs) was abolished.
These are just the latest cuts in a decades-long programme of selling off school playing fields, public tennis courts, pitch and putting and other leisure spaces, frequently to build large supermarkets in which we can feed our sugar addictions instead of any appetite for exercise.
Sure, maybe one or two lucky or privileged youngsters may be inspired by current Olympians to the extent that they will be elite athletes by 2024, but far more people will be inspired to simply buy an overpriced pair of trainers, gym membership or a tennis racket that will be used once before it’s back to tray bakes and lethargy.
The issue is not, perhaps, the level of funding given to elite sports in itself, it is the fact that it is done in isolation from efforts to improve health and involvement in mass participation sports.
The issue is not, perhaps, the level of funding given to elite sports in itself, it is the fact that it is done in isolation from efforts to improve health and involvement in mass participation sports, and certainly compared to under-funding of the NHS and over-expenditure on Trident, it’s far from a waste of resources.
In proportion it’s fine to feel happy for Laura Trott and Jason Kenny and their sporting romance, to use individual achievements to feel better about yourself and your country.
But there’s a fine line between soothing the rough edges of reality by using Olympian success as a security blanket against the rough edges of reality and using the blanket to completely blindfold yourself from reality.
The BBC is the epitome of the latter; it is the conductor of this flag-waving extravaganza, using it as an excuse for a two-week long athletic last night of the proms. All presenters and expert summarisers seemed constantly on the brink of ecstatic laughter and pant-wetting excitement about pretty much everything.
Simon Jenkins, writing in the Guardian last week, went so far as to liken it to "soviet levels of propaganda". Every individual success translated into a success for 'us'. A 'we’re all in it together' spirit as we bask in the reflected glory, the golden glow.
Perhaps when that glow fades, in the cold light of day, we might see that countries that care more about how high they finish in tables ranking rates of life expectancy, health and happiness and the linked factors of wealth distribution, housing standards and homelessness might be greater countries than those that prioritise cycling, rowing and dressage.
Picture courtesy of Captain Roger Fenton
Check out what people are saying about how important CommonSpace is. Pledge your support today.
