- 8 Sep 08, 09:34 AM
Beijing
The pattern of the Beijing Paralympics is already set, and ParalympicsGB seems likely to achieve success in the same areas as their Olympic predecessors.
So with three cycling and one swimming gold after the first day, what is it about these sports which has shot Britain to prominence in areas where we had formerly struggled? And how does Paralympics provision compare with Olympic provision?
Make no mistake, this success, with this level of consistency, is about money.
It is lottery funding, channelled through UK Sport, which is designed to meet the athletes day-to-day living costs so that they can concentrate full-time on their sport, and provide the money that allows them to train, travel and compete to bring them to their peak at exactly the right time.
Paralympic cyclists and swimmers in particular are integrated into the programmes that their Olympic counterparts follow; so that, for example, the cyclists train in Manchester, follow the same regimes and even share each other's equipment (our first gold medallist, Simon Richardson, was using Chris Hoy's handlebars, and Jason Queally's frame).
But, there is quite a large disparity in the amount of cash the Olympians and the Paralympians are given.
And the gap is getting wider. Over the four-year period between Athens and Beijing, the Olympic funding trebled, to £235m. On the other hand, Paralympic provision, which stood at £14m, only slightly more than doubled, to almost £30m.
To put it another way, compare that £30m with the £22m given to the Olympic cyclists alone. So, in this age when the Olympic movement aspires to include the Paralympians as full partners, is this fair and equal?
Liz Nicol, director of elite performance for UK Sport, insists that it is. She points out that the pathway of an Olympic athlete is longer, and more expensive to follow; more competitions to fund, more travel, and a free market which means Olympic coaches are more expensive to hire.
The essential calculation they make, taking into account an individual athlete's likelihood of achieving a medal, plus future potential, is exactly the same. And significantly, Paralympic coaches and athletes we've spoken to seem to agree.
Cyclist Jody Cundy gets £24,000 a year so that, as he puts it, "I can put food on the table and pay my fuel bills without worrying".
And Tim Reddish, British Disability Swimming's national performance director, whose squad in Athens produced 52 medals, points out that with millions of pounds of lottery money invested by ordinary people, it is a business, and people are entitled to medals for their investment.
The question that lingers, though, is whether more investment in developing Paralympic sport would bring those pathways closer to Olympic levels.
You can hear more on the funding of our Paralympians on You & Yours on BBC Radio 4 just after midday on Monday.
About this blog
Links to the blogs of all the contributors can be found below.
Subscribe to BBC Sport: Olympics blog
You can stay up to date with BBC Sport: Olympics blog via these feeds.
BBC Sport: Olympics blog Feed(RSS)
BBC Sport: Olympics blog Feed(ATOM)
If you aren't sure what RSS is you'll find our beginner's guide to RSS useful.
Olympics headlines
Visit the BBC Sport website
Visit the Olympics index
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
A toughie this. We can't spend limitless amounts on funding elite sport especially when it could be spent at the grassroots instead. The reason for funding elite sports is that it creates a feel-good factor across the nation and helps inspire others to take up sport.
Success in the Olympics has clearly achieved both those things. Success in the Paralympics, for the vast majority of people, would not.
Complain about this comment
It would appear that the blog by Apbbforum is quite discriminatory towards the disabled community. Surely funding is needed across the whole of the grass roots- which is able-bodied and disabled.
If you compare both communities- many of the disabled athletes struggle to gain funding. Most only receive funding when they win a medal and it is their families who financially support them. Majority of able-bodied athletes obtain funding before they win a medal.
If you compare how our disabled athletes are treated in comparison to other countries, our athletes are quite worse off. The French has offered cash incentives to their disabled athletes and are on equal pay. The chinese gain houses and cars. Our disabled athletes receive the bare minimum e.g., If a powerlifter wins a medal they gain approx £15,000.00 a year with no incentives (pays for coaching, diet, travel costs etc). Our disabled athletes compete for the love of the sport. I question how many able-bodied athletes would do the same now- in the past they did!
Perhaps they should reduce the funding for able bodied athletes- surely their costs cannot amount to more than a disabled athletes! This funding could be used to seek out new talent because the best talent has never had the opportunity to row a boat, throw a javelin or shot a bow- just existed in our communties unnoticed. Surely disabled should have rights as able bodied and receive the kudos and accolades as their able bodied counterparts. Otherwise if this is not the case Great Britain is treating Paralympians as second class citizens!
Complain about this comment
"The reason for funding elite sports is that it creates a feel-good factor across the nation and helps inspire others to take up sport.
Success in the Olympics has clearly achieved both those things. Success in the Paralympics, for the vast majority of people, would not. APbbforum"
Are you really saying that you don't find watching swimmers with no arms breaking world records and one-legged high jumpers clearing 6 feet inspirational?
I never fail to be humbled by the Paralympics, something which many of our able-bodied performers should learn from. I find it hard to have sympathy with someone who whinges about "only" winning a silver, when you look at the Paralympians who have really been dealt a bad hand in life.
I also agree 100% with No1specialk. Considering the amount of money our non-Paralympians can - and in some cases do - earn aside from the lottery funding, maybe we should consider switching the 235m and 30m figures over!
Complain about this comment
I think APbbforum makes a good point about funding the Paralympics. It is not discriminatory at all to suggest that the funding is not cost effective.
The efforts of the Paralympians can be inspirational, but that is not a good enough reason to fund them.
Why should Paralympians recieve the same accolades as their able bodied counterparts? Paralympians compete in limited categories of an elite minority.
Would the money not be better spent on funding more general disabled participation?
Complain about this comment
Openminded1:
'Why should Paralympians recieve the same accolades as their able bodied counterparts? Paralympians compete in limited categories of an elite minority.'
Because like their able bodied counterparts, they're elite athletes in a major international competition, and not unlike the Olympics, qualifying for these is not easy either. Disabled athletes need coaching, medical support and other expenses payed as well: would you rather your paralympic athletes just dissapeared because nobody cared to fund them? Setting them apart is not only discriminating, but also somewhat ignorant: "surely these people have less expenses than an able-bodied athlete, so we can direct less funding their way".
Do you know that a paralympic racer's chair costs around £1,400 each and a quad rugby chair are not far from that? Or that without funding, many of these athletes cannot afford to go to these games or even take the time to train specifically for them? I haven't researched, but up to where I know, prostetic legs and blades are not cheap either.
In my country, many paralympic coaches are well known for not charging a thing for their services. If they did we'd never get an athlete over there because nobody would be able to afford it: this is because we currently do not have a fund specifically for our Paralympians. The only support they receive are the scraps the Olympic Comittee decides to send their way (many have been known to have to make public collects in order to complete their expenses)--and still, Mexico's Paralympians have won twice more gold medals in 12 years than the ablebodied Olympians have in 84 years. You tell me if that's not inspirational enough.
Complain about this comment
The funding needs to be equal - there is no credible argument for it not to be. The Paralympics are not about "inspiration" - they're purely and simply elite Disability Sport. But even in Paralympic sport, certain sports seem to be favoured over others. They all work equally hard to get those medals, so they should all be funded. And if it lifts a few of my fellow Disabled people out of the poverty and discrimination that we all face, then so be it. They EARNED it.
Complain about this comment
But why should society pay for elite sport of any description when the money could be spent on other things such as improving grassroots facilities? It has to be because it creates a feel-good factor and inspires others.
And I repeat that as far as the Paralympics is concerned those two effects are far, far smaller than for the Olympics. Take a look at today's paper (any one will do) if you're not convinced.
Complain about this comment
Peter, as regards funding you will know better than I how it works. But it has been repeatedly mentioned that many of the paralympic athletes, esp. the cyclists, share the same training facilities as the regular athletes (in case of cycling the Manchester velodrome) and train alongside them. How much, if any of that £30m goes to paying for the already-funded facilities? Or do the paralympic bodies pay only for suitable facilities for their athletes, e.g. special equipment?
It seems to me therefore that many (perhaps not all) paralympians are also benefitting from the money allocated to "able-bodied" sports. If so then, the "disparity of £30m vs £225m is not quite as large as the simple numbers make it appear. To my mind that is a good thing, as it means that the money (both the £30m and the £225m) is being used as efficiently as possible. The paralympians also do (they all say so) get a huge boost from training with the other athletes.
If you look at the medal count, the paralympians are delivering way more cost-efficiently than the regular athletes.
Greatest good of the greatest number argument is seductive, but the bigger picture is provideing "opportunity for all". That is why the paralympians show continue with the same or increased funding, in my opinion.
Finally, though, of course the succes of our paralympic athletes provides a rare and welcome change from the usual negativity about disabled people. That is not something that can be easily valued in pure money terms, but it is geniune benefit.
Complain about this comment
If you look at the Funding per head the numbers are similar.
There are vastly more able bodied athletes with potential Olympic aspirations as opposed to disabled.
eg. For every potential paraolympic oarsman who puts themself up for selection, there are about 10 able bodied athletes doing the same thing for the full Olympics. Same for cycling etc.
So able bodies sports should get the greatly increase funding from disabled.
The equality arguement raises its head every 4 years. The fact always remains that it is very very significantly harder to make the real Olympics than it is to make the Paraolympics.
Complain about this comment
"If you look at the Funding per head the numbers are similar" DMBOSTON
"I'd love to carry on in the sport but I can't finance it anymore" Stephen Payton
That doesn't seem to support your argument, DMBOSTON.
Complain about this comment
Sorry?
Comment 10 has no relevance to the issue. There are plenty of Olympic Athletes who are cash strapped and could be far better off by retiring. Do you really think that the Olympic Gold medalists are rich from Funding? If a few are better off its from sponsorship.
The point of the comment was that when you spread 253 mio out over the potential pool of Olympic hopefuls and then spread 30 mio out over the Paraolympic hopefuls, funding per athlete head will be very similar.
There are MANY more Olympic events and hence athletes and there are many many more able bodies athletes needing funding in individual sports than there are disabled which in reality is a very small pool.
On a side point, when a guy like Weir can do every distance from 800m to Marathon you PROVE the lack of depth and the fact that it is just a different sort of event to the Olympics. A fantastic event, and one that should be supported. But equality in funding would be ridiculous.
Complain about this comment
As regards Mr Payton to be specific. Perhaps he should be asking his sporting body why he was one of only two athletes not funded by lottery?
I think using him as an example is pretty poor form and it did not take much of a google to see he is the exception not the rule as regards funding.
Complain about this comment
'The fact always remains that it is very very significantly harder to make the real Olympics than it is to make the Paraolympics.'
Not in training terms it isn't, although I don't think that's what you meant.
As a disabled person I feel we have to be realistic. The truth is that there will always be more coverage and money around the Olympics because it does involve more people and that is fair.
The question is whether the money received for the Paralympics (regardless of what it is for the Olympics) is fair given the amounts needed for success and compared to how it has been used in the past.
However I am disappointed by the coverage particularly in the written press. This is once every 4 years and we are the 2nd best nation in the world. It deserves more coverage than county cricket, rugby news early in the season, F1 with no race for another week and so on. The Times today was a disgrace - the only coverage was of a classification scandal. It's fine for them to print that (they'd do the same with drugs in the able-bodied events) but in no way should that have been the only coverage.
Complain about this comment
Only in some sports and then a few athletes is training comparable. For most the necessary training to be an Olympic competitor is significantly more than to be a Paralympic competitor.
This arguement crops up every 4 years as well, along with the exposure to media issue.
TV is a competitive business. If they do not put on the programs people want to see then they lose viewers. You cannot force things on viewers and the coverage in press and on TV reflects the general populus interest in the Paralympics. Significant but not over overwhelming.
If you look at the Google Groups for individual sports, you will find many threads on the Olympics but zero discussion about the Paralympics.
In the US, I am yet to see a single article, TV news snippet or any reference to the games.
The competitors, supporters (and i am one) and those interested should enjoy it for what it is and not worry about constantly trying to compare it with the Worlds greatest sporting event. They are fabulous sportsmen and women, great competitors, dedicated and driven. It is not and never going to be able to even get close to the Olympics as regards a sporting event.
The best thing the paralympics could do would be to DISTANCE its self from the Olympics. People are "Lympics" out. They don't want to see another opening ceremony and the news has been overwhelmed by Olympics news. The paralympics needs to escape the Olympic shadow.
Complain about this comment
DMBOSTON your comments scream out that disabled athletes and disabled people should be treated as second class citizens. I'm sure that Dame Tanni Grey Thompson would disagree with your comment that she had to train less that an able-bodied athlete. Also the great Emma Brown who won 2 gold medals for powerlifting would also disagree with you, she was the strongest woman in the world disabled or able-bodied. She trained using the same program as a able-bodied athletes' at the same intensity. It was also her family who fininancially supported untill she won her first paralympic gold medal.
I would like to see Chris Hoy ride blind folded and Sir Steve Redgrave row without the use of his legs. I'm sure this would highlight the difficulties our disabled athletes overcome.
As for media coverage it has improved slightly but still falls short.
As for differences in numbers trying their hand at a sport is concerned this country (UK) is still trying to fight its way out of the dark ages. I've seen discrimination at first hand in archery where even my local club have discrimated against its own disabled athletes. I have challeged them but unfortunately due to narrowed minded and uneducated individuals can not be persuaded to the worth of disabled athletes. Society is to blame for this and the media is useless. Without proper media coverage many people will remain in the dark.
Complain about this comment
Every time a reasonable arguement is put forward and it is provable and non discrimitory, the guilt trip reponse is dragged out by the Paralympic arguers and that is EXACTLY why you have not progressed in the media as you would like. The media ignors it because it doesnt want to touch the issues.
In response to your comments.
Strap Campbell into a rowing boat similar to Aggar and give him a few weeks to get used to it and he would beat aggar.
Aggar is only 18 months into his rowing career. It is IMPOSSIBLE to make the Olympic rowing team at that stage. Everyone this year was at least 4 years or more and the medalists many many more.
The point is how many cyclists did the blindfold cyclist have to beat to be selected? and therefore how good did he have to be to be selected?
For your guide, Redgrave was very much in debt and lived on small grants etc. until he approachd his 5th gold medal.
No one said Paraolympians are second class citizens
But NO event in the world equals the Olympics. So yes in comparison to the Olympics, the Paralympics IS a second class event.
Paralympians would receive significantly more respect if they stopped trying to make everyone accept that the Paralympics an event that it simply is not.
As regards your archery club?
That is clearly a discrace and IS discrimitory. But it is not the same arguement as we were discussing.
Complain about this comment
Remember, this discussion is about funding. I maintain the funding per potential competitor head is not as out of kilter as the actual numbers suggest.
Complain about this comment
Actually DMBOSTON u've missed the point i was making. Why I referred to my archery club was an example of problems faced by disabled athletes. If potential athletes are put off or prevented at grass roots to competing then you will not have the numbers trying out for the Paralympics.
Secondly if you had read my previously blog carefully you would have seen that I written that previous olympic athletes also had a lack of funding.
Thirdly if you had read my first blog you would have read that I suggested that the distribution of funding should be equal amongst able-bodied and disabled athletes. In making the funding equal what money left should be used at grass roots to support potential disabled and able-bodies athletes. This is where money is much needed, as I have previously stated the best athlete has never participated because they've never had the oppuntunity!
Complain about this comment
One in five people of working age in the UK has a disability - the perceived small pool of individuals eligible for disability sports is probably bigger than you think.
I'm a middle aged woman with a disability - hemiplegia- that would make me eligible for many paralympic sports. I loved sports as a kid - I could run quite fast, though falling over even faster was often a possibility. I don't ever remember disability sports being even mentioned to me. I would have loved to have been a Paralympian, but I got on with life in a non-disabled world, as most of us with disabilities do.
The money needs to go in at grass roots level so that talented youngsters realise they can be Paralympians, it needs to stay at the higher levels to keep them as Paralympians. In 2012 we have a genuine prospect of topping the medals table, and of providing more inspirational stories to further the cause of disability equality.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS