GAMES

November 29 - Tessa Jowell (pictured), the Shadow Olympics Minister, said she is deeply concerned and sceptical over what the school sports legacy from the London 2012 Games will be due to the fact that the new coalition Government altered the plans for school sport when they came to office last year.

Jowell served as Culture Secretary for six years in the last Labour Government and is widely credited with getting the support of her Government and then Prime Minister Tony Blair for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic bid at a time when there was little backing for the idea.

Jowell then played a major role in helping the London 2012 bid secure an unlikely victory in Singapore in 2005 before setting up a strong support scheme to get school children participating in more sport because of the Games.

But Jowell now fears that the school sport legacy plans promised back in 2005 could be ruined due to the fact that the current Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt and Sports Minister Hugh Robertson have a far different approach to school sport.

The duo have been instrumental in setting up the new School Games, which builds on the success of the previous Government's UK School Games, but Jowell says that this event alone will not be enough.

"I really do commend Hugh Robertson and Jeremy Hunt for the cross-party support that they have created on the Olympics and I sit on the Olympic Board with both of them so I'm still heavily involved in the Government decision making process around London 2012," said Jowell here in central London.

"We disagree only one thing and that is school sport.

"I am a huge supporter of the School Games which build on the UK School Games our Government set up.

"I am however sceptical that the School Games, on its own, will be enough for school children who operate outside that event.

"I'm just deeply concerned because not all school children will get the opportunity to compete in the School Games and there is no real sports participation plan for them.

"We promised in Singapore to provide a real legacy for young people from the London 2012 Games and we were certainly delivering that under our Government.

"Had we kept our scheme intact, the figures show that 90 per cent of children would have participated in two hours of sport in school per week by London 2012 and that 70 per cent would have participated in five hours or more of sport in school per week by the Games.

"But the drop off rate in the last year since the new Government broke up our system has been alarming."

The new Government's strategy to school sport was heavily criticised when in last year's Comprehensive Spending Review, Education Secretary Michael Gove (pictured) announced that the entire £162 million ($260 million/€190 million) funding for the School Sports Partnerships would be axed.

The decision was met by a huge wave of protests from teachers, pupils and Olympic athletes, like teenage diver Tom Daley, who forced the Government to partially backtrack on the decision.

The Department for Education (DfE) therefore agreed to pay the School Sports Partnerships to the end of the last academic year at a cost of £47 million ($73 million/€55 million), while £65 million ($101 million/€76 million) from the DfE's spending review settlement has been allocated to allow every school in England to release a PE teacher for one day a week for the following two academic years.

But Jowell says that this is not enough.

"We can see that at this rate, with the current scheme in place, the problem is not going any better," she said.

"But my key point is that there is still time to solve this problem.

"It is not too late to go back to the old system and stop all the redundancies of those passionate people who go into schools to help with sport.

"At the moment, I just think that is a crying shame that the rug is being pulled from under the feet of a great system that really was showing fantastic results in terms of school children participating in sport.

"If there is a significant fall between 2010 and 2014 in terms of school sport participation, we would have missed a major, major opportunity.

"The jury is obviously still out on that one but things don't look good right now unless we start making changes and start making them quickly."

By Tom Degun

Source: www.insidethegames.biz

Indian athletes are threatening to boycott next summer's London Olympics in an extraordinary stand-off with the head of the 2012 Games, Lord Coe, over his controversial sponsorship deal with a chemical company.

Lord Coe is under personal attack for signing the deal with Dow Chemical – under fire in India for its ownership of Union Carbide, whose Indian subsidiary was responsible for the Bhopal industrial disaster, one of the world's worst, estimated to have killed up to 25,000 people and injured over half a million.

The former Olympics minister Tessa Jowell, who worked closely with Lord Coe to win the Olympics for London, last night called on the former British Olympian to cancel the deal with Dow before the controversy irreparably damages the standing of the 2012 Games. Ms Jowell told The Independent: "There is a point at which you have to say you cannot take the reputational risk."

Lord Coe has one week to talk the Indian Olympic Association out of a boycott: on 5 December athletes and sports bosses in the world's second-most populous country will meet to vote on walking out of the London Games. Both the British and Indian governments will be asked to intervene to stave off the boycott as international outrage from politicians, athletes and human-rights groups mounts. A boycott by India, which does not boast a history of great Olympic success but has significant business and cultural links to the UK, would be a major embarrassment for Britain.

Dow is a core sponsor of the International Olympic Committee – a $1bn (£647m) deal that Lord Coe can do nothing about. But it is the London Games' recent awarding of a much smaller £7m sponsorship deal to Dow, allowing it to "wrap" the stadium in company fabric – and giving the chemical giant a global media profile next summer – that has outraged some athletes and politicians in India.

The chief minister of Madhya Pradesh, the state of which Bhopal is the capital, has demanded the Indian government support an athletes' boycott if the Dow deal continues. Shivraj Singh Chauhan said: "The funds intended for sponsoring the Olympics would be far better spent in alleviating the misery suffered by the people of Bhopal." He intends to take up the boycott with Sonia Gandhi, president of India's ruling Congress Party, while Ms Jowell travels to Delhi this week to seek views from ministers and athletes.

The 1984 gas disaster dogs Dow through its full ownership of Union Carbide Corporation, whose subsidiary Union Carbide India ran the Bhopal pesticide plant. Dow bought Union Carbide in 2001 and insists that the legal claims surrounding the incident were resolved long before it acquired the company – which the London 2012 organising committee accepts. Dow claims the $470m paid by Union Carbide in 1991 to the disaster victims was final, although this is being contested in the Indian Supreme Court.

Dow and Union Carbide are defendants in an Indian public-interest litigation case for clean-up of the factory site which campaign groups say continues to cause deformities and cancers among families using contaminated groundwater.

Other criticisms of Dow have included anger over its manufacture of the defoliant Agent Orange, used by the US in Vietnam. In 2010 India's government blacklisted Dow AgroSciences India for five years for bribing government officials. Dow AgroSciences is a wholly owned Dow subsidiary. In 2007 the US Securities and Exchange Commission accused Dow AgroSciences India Pvt Ltd of making "improper payments" between 1996 and 2001. Dow paid a civil penalty of $325,000 in 2007 without admitting or denying the allegations. Ms Jowell said: "I believe Sebastian Coe and Locog [the organising committee] want to do the right thing. It is not in their interest to have an association with a company with a record that is inconsistent with Olympic values.

"The unacceptability of Dow hinges on the continuing nature of the crisis for people who live in that area. It is better to have an unwrapped stadium than one wrapped in controversy."

The pressure from inside India is mounting. Aslam Sher Khan, an Olympic gold medal winner who became a politician, said the ongoing suffering in Bhopal made Dow's involvement in London "very concerning". He said: "The anniversary is coming up and the people of Bhopal are still shaken by what happened and the ongoing contamination. I am writing to Sonia Gandhi to put pressure on the British Government to rethink its association with this company."

Nobody from Locog was available for an interview but a spokesman said: "We have had absolutely no indication from the Indian National Olympic Committee that there are any plans or discussions to boycott London 2012".

Lord Coe has said: "I have looked at it very closely and I am satisfied that the ownership, operation and the involvement either at the time of the disaster or at the final settlement was not the responsibility of Dow."

Scot Wheeler, of Dow, said last night: "While it is understandable that human emotions evoked by the tragedy remain, allowing a misrepresentation of facts and to rewrite history – as some are trying to do – is not only wrong but sends an unfortunate and inaccurate message that obscures rather than clarifies the Bhopal tragedy.

"These attempts to misdirect responsibility do not change the fact that Dow has never had a connection with the disaster or its aftermath."

By Nina Lakhani

Source: www.independent.co.uk

November 28 - India will not boycott the London 2012 Olympics over Dow Chemical's sponsorship of the Games,  the acting President of the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) Vijay Kumar Malhotra (pictured) has promised.

Dow are one of 11 worldwide Olympic Partners and speculation has been growing that India will pull out of London 2012 due to the fact that Dow bought US chemical firm Union Carbide whose Bhopal plant in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh leaked toxic gases in 1984, killing thousands of people in the world's worst industrial accident.

Following the Bhopal disaster, Union Carbide settled its liabilities with the Indian Government in 1989 by paying $470 million (£310 million/€351 million) for Bhopal victims and even though Dow bought Union Carbide a decade after the compensation deal, the company has been put in the firing line for its sponsorship of a temporary £7 million (£11 million/€8 million) wrap that will encase the London 2012 Olympic Stadium in Stratford.

But Malhotra, the IOA senior vice-president who is acting President as Suresh Kalmadi was arrested earlier this year due to alleged corruption in awarding contracts for the 2010 Commonwealth Games, said that there is no planned boycott from the team, as had been reported in some British newspapers.

"We are meeting next week but it's not about boycotting the Games," said Malhotra told Reuters.

"Some people have raised a concern about the sponsorship issue and we will discuss that, along with some other issues.

"Some former Olympians are upset with the sponsorship deal and would like them [London 2012] to reconsider it."

The Indian Government is still pursuing an additional $1.1 billion (£707 million/€822 million) from Dow for victims despite the settlement from Union Carbide

Around 3,000 people died in the initial disaster, but a further 15,000 have since died from poisoning.

Dow's Olympic sponsorship has caused anger across particularly in Madhya Pradesh where senior figures, including chief minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan, stating that instead of sponsoring the Games, the company should spend the money on Bhopal survivors.

But both the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and London 2012 have backed Dow, who has been a supporter of the Olympic Movement for more than 30 years.

The IOC said they recognised the Bhopal gas disaster was a tragic event and they have been briefed on the history of the incident.

"The IOC understands that Dow never owned or operated the facility in Bhopal, and that the State Government of Madhya Pradesh owns and controls the former plant site," said an IOC statement.

London 2012 chairman Sebastian Coe has also backed Dow.

"I am satisfied that the ownership, operation and the involvement either at the time of the disaster or at the final settlement was not the responsibility of Dow," said Coe, who has Indian blood due to his mother.

Dow has also expressed their disappointment that they have suddenly come under fire for an incident that they were not responsible for.

"It is disappointing and misguided that some people are trying to assign blame and responsibility to Dow," said a Dow spokesperson.

"Dow acquired the shares of Union Carbide Corporation more than 16 years after the tragedy, and 10 years after the settlement agreement – paid by Union Carbide Corporation and Union Carbide India, Limited – was approved by the Indian Supreme Court.

By Tom Degun

Source: www.insidethegames.biz

November 28 - Adidas have extended their sponsorship deal of the British Olympic Association (BOA) beyond London 2012 until Rio 2016, continuation of a partnership that started in 1983.

The new deal includes a sponsorship and a licensing deal under which adidas will receive marketing rights to Team GB.

In return the German sportswear manufacturer will provide the BOA with all of its sportswear requirements, including all competition and leisure wear for every athlete and team official participating at the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi as well as Rio.

They will also provide non-competition wear for all other Olympic youth festivals and Games.

The deal is made up of cash, value-in-kind and marketing support for kit launches.

Under the licensing deal, adidas will create and market exclusive Team GB licensed products that will be retailed to the British public.

"I am delighted that with over a year to go we have already secured our first tier one sponsorship deal for the 2013-2016 quadrennial," said Andy Hunt, the chief executive of the BOA.

"What makes it even more exciting is that it marks a significant kick-start to the British Olympic Association's post-2012 commercial programme.

"Adidas has been a highly valued supporter of the BOA for 28 years now.

"This makes them our longest serving partner and through this partnership, we will continue to mutually build and promote the Team GB brand as a valuable consumer and commercial entity.

"Our long partnership also means that adidas brings vast experience in terms of supplying high-performance sportswear for an incredibly diverse range of summer and winter Olympic sports.

"Furthermore, adidas provides Team GB with industry leading innovation and technology as well as operational and logistical support that is invaluable to an organisation with such complex supply requirements as the BOA.

"We are very proud to have a partner like adidas.

"For our athletes looking and feeling great certainly has an impact on performance and we are confident that with adidas on board, British athletes will not only continue to look and feel great, but they will also be wearing and competing in industry-leading products."

Adidas, who are also a Tier One sponsor of London 2012, claimed that the new deal illustrated its commitment to British sport beyond next year's Olympics.

"This unique partnership is one of the longest in British sporting history and demonstrates our unique multi-sport heritage and our continued on-going investment in sport throughout the UK," said Gil Steyaert, managing director of adidas Market North

"In addition, we are able to illustrate our leadership in product innovation across many specialist sports as well as  our rich legacy in the Games.

"No other brand has a more distinguished history or stronger connection with sport than adidas and we look forward to continuing our support for Team GB to 2016."

By Duncan Mackay

Source: www.insidethegames.biz

(ATR) A simmering battle of wills over the direction of a major Olympic body is now out in the open, a dispute called “vulgar” by one of the protagonists.

The issues: who will take command of the 204-member Association of National Olympic Committees in 2014 and who will represent the association on the IOC’s powerful Executive Board starting next year.

Mario Vazquez Rana has served as ANOC President for 30 years. His current term expires in 2014. But Vazquez will turn 80 in 2012, meaning his career as an IOC member comes to an end -- as well as his ability to continue serving on the IOC Executive Board as the ANOC representative.

European Olympic Committees President Patrick Hickey is leading a movement to see a successor for the ANOC EB seat named as early as next month. So far, Vazquez Rana has not signaled who he would like to succeed him on the EB, while Hickey tells Around the Rings that he wants the seat, subject to vote at the IOC Session next July in London.

Hickey says Vazquez Rana has not represented the interests of the National Olympic Committees on the EB as forcefully as Hickey believes should be done.

“I have spoken to many NOC leaders who say that we are losing ground against the international federations,” Hickey says.

He raised the concern publicly for the first time this week in his address to the EOC general assembly in Sochi.

“To insure a better future for all our members, I think we now have to make our voices heard on this,” said Hickey, proclaiming unhappiness from the world’s NOCs with the 2010 ANOC Assembly in Acapulco, as well as the Sports Ministers meeting held at the conclusion of the Acapulco meeting.

Responding to questions from ATR posed by email, Vazquez blasted Hickey’s speech and called into question his motives.

“I believe no other moment could be more inopportune to express such a diatribe of lies than now, when the Olympic Movement needs further unity, cohesion and a team spirit to carry out its mission to promote the Olympic principles and values worldwide and I truly regret it,” says the ANOC chief.

“When Mr. Hickey took over the EOC’s presidency, we had a respectful relationship of good collaboration, as was the case during President Rogge’s period. However, the lack of coincidence in our approaches and points of view began to be noticeable when Mr. Hickey’s excessive craving for power and his aspiration to different positions became evident, aspirations that have been frustrated over and over again,” said Vazquez referring to past attempts by the Irish sports leader to win an EB seat.

Hickey insists he is not gunning for the ANOC presidency or trying to oust Vazquez from the post.

“I did not call for him to step down,” Hickey says. “I fully expect that he will serve out his mandate until 2014. And then if someone wants to challenge him, that’s their prerogative.”

Hickey is meeting this weekend in Dubai with Olympic Council of Asia President Sheikh Ahmad and other IOC members from Asia to plot the next moves on the ANOC EB seat. They are seeking a decision on the EB nominee Dec. 6 when the ANOC Council, of which Hickey is one of five continental vice presidents, is scheduled to meet in Lausanne.

“Fireworks” is what one of the council members tells ATR he expects at the meeting.

Vazquez Rana tells ATR that the EB seat will be discussed at the meeting but that it will be up to the ANOC general assembly to decide on who replaces him on the EB when it meets in April. Vazquez Rana predicts failure for Hickey.

“In his wild mind he has given rise to a 'battle of succession' in which he intends to involve other directors of ANOC and the NOCs and confuse the public opinion. It seems it is not enough for him to aspire and lose, but that he enjoys tarnishing the name of a prestigious and strong Organization which should be very much above any aspiration of a person or group.

“The NOC representatives that participate in our General Assembly are experienced, they know how to elect their directors and have a very fine instinct to distinguish

honesty, virtue and merits from mediocrity, opportunism, disloyalty and a lack of the most basic ethical principles.

“Due to the fact that I know them and have had the honor to lead them for three decades, I know they will not allow themselves to be confused and that they will elect directors capable of maintaining the course of ANOC and strengthen its leadership as one of the Olympic Movement’s main pillars,” says Vazquez.

“I truly regret the situation provoked by Mr. Hickey, due to the fact that I am not used to deal with these issues through the media before doing so with my colleagues. It is not usual for me to use such a strong tone towards a person, but I had to do it because it was my duty and obligation and part of my responsibilities as ANOC President.

“Nothing and no one will be able to keep us away from the road we chose and much less selfish, ambitious and opportunistic persons who shield behind any excuse to divide and prosper at the expense of ANOC’s image and prestige,” he says to conclude his remarks .

Hickey says he would like to see Vazquez Rana leave ANOC gracefully by not seeking a new term in 2014.

“We would treat him royally, give him a proper send off,” he says.

While it is clear Hickey has his sights on the EB, he says other candidates are possible to succeed Vazquez Rana as ANOC president.

He mentions New Zealand’s Barry Maister, Robin Mitchell of Fiji or OCA chief Ahmad. But the Sheikh may not be available if he succeeds with his own ambitions to become prime minister of Kuwait. And while he is popular and youthful, one IOC member tells ATR that Ahmad can’t be a credible candidate as long as the Kuwait Olympic Committee remains under suspension by the IOC over Kuwaiti law the IOC says intrudes on the autonomy of the NOC, in violation of the Olympic Charter. The suspension has been in effect since last year.

By Ed Hula

Source: www.aroundtherings.com