View submission details
Submission by Simon Balderstone on 01 November 2008.
1. Ensure Australia's continued elite sporting success
I believe there could be a major reduction in duplication and therefore inefficiency, in terms of application of funds and in athlete pathways, if there was consolidation of many structures for sports and sports organisations in Australia, particularly consolidation of federal and State parts and entities of structures and sports – not just the ASC and institutes, etc ; and with that a “pooling” of resources, reducing overlap, increasing efficiency, and having a much more integrated, harmonious system rather than most organisations, even at different levels of administration of the same sport, operating individually and “competing”, often unnecessarily, for the same dollar and assistance. This would ensure the more effective use of funds raised from various sectors .This also applies to Terms of Reference 5 (see below)
2. Better place sport and physical activity as a key component of the Government's preventative health approach
No response
3. Strengthen pathways from junior sport to grassroots community sport right through to elite and professional sport
No response
4. Maintain Australia's cutting edge approach to sports science, research and technology
No response
5. Identify opportunities to increase and diversify the funding base for sport through corporate sponsorship, media and any recommended reforms, such as enhancing the effectiveness of the Australian Sports Foundation
There are three primary ways I feel that the funding of sport in Australia can be more ‘efficient” i.e. maximum , effective use of the government dollars injected into sport .1. “Hiving” off, in administrative terms, the Australian Sports Foundation from the Australian Sports Commission. The ASF should be a stand-alone, “custom-built” , single-purpose organisation with a separate administration and advisory structure from the Australian Sports Commission, but should retain a formal link and association with the ASC and the AIS, in order to maintain its advantageous position (very under-utilised at the moment) to raise funds for community and elite sport in Australia. The ASF should be the pre-eminent, highest-profile, fundraising (from all sectors) entity in general Australian sport – it could work closely with the Australian Olympic Committee. It (the ASF) has a strong structural set of assets for fundraising – its position in the government structure; ensuing resources; and an unsurpassed set of HR assets (the athletes – those connected to the AIS and those connected and able to help in other ways ) but the present position of it does not allow it to be used to anywhere near the maximum of its potential for financial return to Australian sport. The ASC has a major role as peak government administrator of Australian sport, but is exactly that – an administrator of sport, a sports management agency, - rather than a body with specialist or dedicated fundraising expertise and functions. My experience in government (including as an adviser to a Federal Sports Minister and Prime Minister, on sport ) ; in sports/event organisations (General Manager, Executive office, SOCOG; and adviser to the IOC) especially large organisations with complex structures; and in fundraising (Chairman of one NGO and adviser to others) , is that where possible there must be proper and clear “divisions of labour” and clear delineation of roles and responsibilities, and “horses for courses” – sets of resources specially charged with delineated tasks. This particularly applies to the raising of funds. So there should be clearly defined, different tasks , and administrative and advisory structures for the ASC and the ASF, even though they should remain connected by a dotted line. The ASF could then take a holistic approach to sports fundraising in Australia , raising a maximum amount of funds from specific ‘target audiences’ ; and putting an increased amount of money back into ”the system” for spending on community and elite sport. 2. Individual sporting organisations developing far better cash flow management systems and practices (external and internal) to better utilise – and thereby expand – their financial reserves and resources, and in turn be able to rely less on, and on less, direct government funding. This will increase their ability to perform their particular tasks; to expand their programs; and will also ease pressure on government to provide more funds for such expansion. 3. Consolidation of many structures for sports and sports organisations in Australia, particularly consolidation of federal and State parts and entities of structures and sports – not just the ASC and institutes, etc ; and with that a “pooling” of resources, reducing overlap, increasing efficiency, and having a much more integrated, harmonious system rather than most organisations, even at different levels of administration of the same sport, operating individually and “competing” , often unnecessarily, for the same dollar and assistance. This would ensure the more effective use of funds raised from various sectors .I would welcome the opportunity to present my thoughts on these matters to the Independent Review Panel.
Page last updated: 01 November, 2008