[erik06]

Feds fail to deliver on sport funding promise

The Conservative government failed to live up to its election promise of a substantial increase in sport funding in its first budget since taking the reigns as a minority government.

In 2004, as opposition leader, Stephen Harper pledged to provide at least one percent of health spending for sport and physical activity, a promise reiterated in the Conservative election platform.

One per cent of the $43.5 billion federal health budget would be $435 million, effectively tripling the current budget of $140 million annually, which goes towards both high performance and grass roots sport and physical activity.

Instead, the budget delivered a tax credit to help parents pay for their children to participate in sport programs.

The $500 tax credit for parents of children under 16 is expected to cost the government $135 million.

"The new government seemed to be moving cautiously here," said Victor Lachance of the Sport Matters lobby group.

"We would have liked to see action on the problem of inactivity ... but they did offer the tax credit. So they acted on one promise."

http://www.cansport.com/cgi-bin/article ... ec_id=8950

[erik06]

Budget neglects Vanoc's $55m request

The federal government didn't include any money for the 2010 Winter Olympics in Tuesday's budget despite intense lobbying from the Games' organizers, who say the money is crucial to the construction of sports venues.

Instead, there was only the promise that officials in the Department of Canadian Heritage are continuing to "do their due diligence" on a request for $55 million in extra funding.

The money is part of a $110-million request the Vancouver Organizing Committee made to the federal and B.C. governments last year to help close the gap between what Vanoc needs to build or renovate 16 venues, and the $470 million both governments have already committed.

The request has been stuck in Ottawa since last November. Vanoc said the money was urgently needed within two months because it was about to begin a major construction program.

At the same time, Vanoc was having trouble getting the federal government to live up to promises it had already made; the former Liberal minority government failed to pass budget legislation last year for its contribution to Vanoc's construction program. That meant Vanoc had to get a line of credit just to meet its 2005 construction program.

In its November submission, Vanoc blamed a booming construction industry and four years of unadjusted inflation for the budget ballooning by $195 million. However, it said it pared $85 million out of the request by revising and cutting plans. B.C. has already agreed to its half of the request, according to Vanoc's submission to Ottawa.

Despite the dire warnings Vanoc gave to the governments in private meetings last year, it now says the lack of money in the federal budget won't affect its construction program this year after all.

"We continue to have a request for additional capital funding before the federal government, and it is our understanding that they are doing their due diligence," Renee Smith-Valade, Vanoc's vice-president of communications said Tuesday.

"The government partners are up to date on their venue funding. As for the current construction year, we'll pay out of our existing cash resources, and that includes lines of credit, and we will be reimbursed on a timely basis by our government partners," she said. "We haven't committed funds beyond our means."

B.C. Finance Minister Carole Taylor expressed no concern about the lack of federal money for Vanoc in the budget.

"I am quite certain that when the prime minister puts one of his major ministers, minister [David] Emerson, on the Olympic file that we will be able to negotiate appropriate funding for the Olympics," said Taylor.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news ... 333b9b2f3f

[ridenrain]

Wha... Wha...

[Knoss]

Why dose the government have to support amature athletics?

[ridenrain]

I'm always blown away that someone from Ethiopia wins almost all marathons, gets numerous awards, and does well in all Olympics even though their sports program involves a stolen soccer ball and running away from bullets. Throwing money at the problem is obviously not the solution here.
My national identity will not diminish one tiny bit if we never get another gold medal. I'd trade them all for a solid, productive and profitable manufacturing industry, and the solid middle class that comes with it.

[Blue_Nose]

Supporting elite amature athletics is not very reasonable, in my mind. I just don't see the payoff for the general public, as great as it is for a handful of people.

Put that money into recreational athletics available to children... two or three uber athletes are not an acceptable tradeoff to, for example, after-school sports programs, which often suffer when schools must make cuts.

[erik06]

Kids are motivated by our athletes and registration for various sports JUMPS up after the Olympics... if we don't fund our athletes, they won't do well, and if they don't do well, the kids don't have anyone to look up to and will go back to playing xbox. You know... promoting an active and healthy lifestyle.

I wonder how many kids signed up for speed skating after the past Olympics...?

[erik06]

Quote:

I'm always blown away that someone from Ethiopia wins almost all marathons, gets numerous awards, and does well in all Olympics even though their sports program involves a stolen soccer ball and running away from bullets. Throwing money at the problem is obviously not the solution here.

You are VERY incorrect in that assumption. Ethiopian & Kenyan runners have a vigorous training program. The money they win from these marathons and such is usually put towards creating a running program in their own village.

I'm sorry you see Africa as crime ridden, civil war torn criminal filled continent and assume they run well because they are black and from Africa.

[Blue_Nose]

I didn't sign up for soccer, tennis, or volleyball throughout school because of watching it on television... I did it because my friends were doing it, and they did it for the same reasons. I was inspired by watching the kids who were older than me.

Who needs a 10 year old speed skater anyway? Using the Olympics as an inspiration for kids to become physically active send the message that you can be an elite athlete if you work your ass off and dedicate yourself to sport. Is that what kind of message we should be sending? What about kids who just want to play on a team after school? Should they be given the impression that absolute commitment to sports is their ultimate goal?

[bootlegga]

Blue_Nose wrote:

Supporting elite amature athletics is not very reasonable, in my mind. I just don't see the payoff for the general public, as great as it is for a handful of people.

Put that money into recreational athletics available to children... two or three uber athletes are not an acceptable tradeoff to, for example, after-school sports programs, which often suffer when schools must make cuts.

Maybe then the obesity problem in this country would disappear...

[ridenrain]

Aside from furiously trying to paint me as a racist, you don't provide any details.
I did use Ethiopia as an example but Kenya and a number of other countries could have been used. These are countries that are far from wealthy, yet produce world class athletes. The idea that we will have better athletes if we spend more money is as silly as expecting the health care system to get better by simply dumping more money into it.
Please prove to me that their victories are from an organized and well funded athletic support system.

I'd rather see lots of fat kids playing hockey/soccer in the streets than a sliver of "professionals" hoering themselves for a media contract.

[erik06]

It's nice to see some of the CKA right all the sudden oppose amateur athletics because the conservatives broke their election promise.

The reality is people are motivated by amateur athletes, and as a result of great olympic moments, people are INSPIRED to sign up for a sport and get active. Maybe not everyone will become an olympic champion or score the winning goal in game 7 of the stanley cup championship, but people are going to be more active and our country will have less of a weight problem.

Most other countries get the idea that amateur athletics is important... Russia have it's gold medalists $250,000. Our guys need two or three jobs to support themselves as amateur athletes. Funding is critical.

I'm sure we didn't emerge as one of the worlds great hockey powers by ignoring and underfunding hockey Canada.

[SireJoe]

This money isnt about funding athletes, its about funding Vancouver with what it needs to create the best venue for the Olympics. A world stage that COULD boost tourism in Vancouver substantially. The residual effects or those of which I, and Im sure Vancouver, are most interested in. Aside from that, the only thing that makes an amature is where they are in their career. Giving them more money means a better possiblity of them no longer being amature athletes, but rather professional competing at a professional level. I dont see this as being a bad thing.

[chilipeppers]

Knoss wrote:

Why dose the government have to support amature athletics?

They shouldn't, you want to play sports, its a choice, taxpayers shouldn't have to support it. I can live with the taxcredit but thats all.

[ridenrain]

As I said before, whaaa.
Amateur athletics is just another small but vocal special interest group. If you feel that they are not getting enough money, please feel free to cut them a check.
Finding for the 2006 Olympics is another issue.

(How's those numbers on Kenya's Amateur athletics program going?)