Mugliett promises efficiency in sports administration

Parliamentary Secretary Jesmond Mugliett yesterday defended the government's decision to replace the Department of Sports with a revamped Malta Sports Council.

He said the structure of the council would give it the flexibility which the department lacked, and it would therefore be able to achieve more with the funds allocated to it.

Mr Mugliett was concluding the debate on the Sports Bill. The bill was later given a second reading after a division, with the opposition voting against.

Mr Mugliett said this bill followed publication of a White Paper last year and an extensive consultation programme which had seen many suggestions by sports bodies adopted by the government. It was a pity that it was only now that the opposition was voicing its criticism after being silent throughout this process.

Mr Mugliett denied that the bill gave the minister responsible for sports any powers he did not have before. The only power he was being given was to issue legal notices, such as on violence or doping in sports events, a power which was clearly needed.

Today the minister was already responsible for the destination of sports funds. But over the past four years the government had given substantial funds to the Malta Olympic Committee for distribution to sports associations as it deemed fit. Over the past years, sports associations were also regularly given funds by the government for the development of facilities. This policy was now being embedded as one of the functions of the sports council.

Mr Mugliett observed that capital expenditure on sports had risen massively under the present government. Under the Labour government, capital expenditure reached a maximum of Lm250,000 and in one year the Labour government only spent Lm110,000.

Turning to criticism of the composition of the sports council, Mr Mugliett said this was not meant to be a forum of sports associations but the government's executive arm in the sports sector.

In the past the sports council as originally constituted and the Department of Sports had ended up working separately from each other, with hardly any coordination.

The new council would be lean, with people engaged only according to needs. But it was a fact that the department lacked expertise in various sectors, such as anti-doping.

The Sports Department, he said, currently cost the government Lm380,000 per year. But could anybody say that the sports sector was getting value for money from this amount? The way the department was structured was unwieldy and crying out for change. For example, there was a lack of flexibility among the workers. Those who watered the turf refused to mend fences. Workers responsible for a particular ground insisted that they could not work in another ground, so that while there was only one person deployed to the Hibs ground, there was a regiment for the Marsa grounds. There had been a situation were people responsible for pools insisted their job description precluded them from doing other work, even when the equipment they maintained was not in use. Furthermore, with sports activities usually held after hours, the department's workers had to be brought in on overtime just to keep sports facilities open.

It was hoped that talks would be held with the workers before the committee stage of this bill was considered. One suggestion could be for the workers to form cooperatives to sell sports grounds maintenance to the government. This arrangement would be acceptable as long as there was flexibility in the interests of sports.

Mr Mugliett said nobody would disagree with the calls made by various MPs for financial incentives to be offered to sports associations, when this was possible.

But clearly the top priority should be to give the associations the facilities they could work and practice in. It was for this reason that the government was investing in new facilities at Tal-Qroqq, Cottonera and elsewhere.

As for the new procedure laid down in the bill for the transfer of government properties to sports associations, Mr Mugliett said the procedure of debating such transfers in the House committee had not worked as the opposition had always insisted on a debate in the full House, leading to a lot of time wastage.

Mr Mugliett said it was unfair to criticise Church schools that their facilities were not accessible to the public. Such facilities were open at rates which were half ordinary rates in private establishments and they were being used by many associations. Indeed, the situation would be worse had facilities such as those at De La Salle and St Aloysius not been available. In many cases, such schools had blazed a trail before the government.

Concluding, Mr Mugliett called for all those involved in the sports sector to contribute to fine tune the bill in the interest of sports.

Earlier in the debate, Labour MP Marie-Louise Coleiro said sports needed to be seen not just for its recreational value, but as a source to prevent social and health problems, including problems of drug and alcohol abuse.

She observed that the bill in its declaration of principles said that sports and physical education should be taught in primary and secondary schools, but made no mention of post secondary, vocational and tertiary educational establishments.

The bill, she said, banned discrimination in access to sport. This should include a ban on discrimination which stemmed from financial means.

The Labour MP said the new sports council needed to include a member who knew the sports needs of persons with disabilities. She also complained that the composition of the sports council was wholly dependent on the government.

Mr Joe Debono Grech (MLP) regretted that money considerations had taken over the competitive spirit of sports all over the world. It was difficult for Maltese athletes to compete with athletes who were paid millions to train full time.

Unfortunately corruption had infiltrated several sports disciplines in Malta and unless action was taken to fight it, people could be put off sports.

How was it that some players who did nothing all year were selected for the national football team?

Malta used to get good football results against Turkey and similar teams, but the situation had deteriorated here while Turkey came third in the World Cup. Why? Wasn't it for this reason that the people were not interested in the national team?

The MFA was right to insist that player transfers could not take place before all financial arrangements were made because it was not fair that players were greedy and turned their backs on their clubs when they were in financial straits, ignoring the sacrifices of the committees and supporters. This was a bad lesson for Malta's youngsters.

Sports was a vocation like all others. The mistake was that club committees were paying thousands of liri to players as they aimed for success, but a line should be drawn before such clubs collapsed under the weight of their debts.

Those players who were not interested in really playing football should retire.

Much the same applied to the game of bocci and other disciplines.

The government should help those athletes which were prepared to make sacrifices and not those who put their interests before what their committees and supporters expected of them.

Mr Debono Grech said school sports teachers should be better utilised. These teachers should also liaise with sports nurseries in the various localities, assisted by parents as necessary. They should also be committed enough to follow up promising youngsters they identified in schools and guide them to new opportunities. Was it too much to ask teachers to point out the promising youngsters?

It was a shame that Malta's sports facilities were massively under utilised, particularly in the evening when they should be most used, particularly in the summer.

Dr Jean Pierre Farrugia said the Maltese people were unfortunately sports spectators not participants. The broadcasting media, even excluding the satellite channels, contained a high proportion of sports, showing the interest of the Maltese in sports. Yet much remained to be done for participation in sports to reach anything like satisfactory levels.

The government was doing its part, but this was not something which depended on the government alone. The situation would not improve for as long as schools continued to be seen solely as institutions for academic achievement.

Dr Farrugia regretted that there was a lack of statistics on sports. Indeed, the limited data available spoke on attendance, not participation.

The Nationalist MP said that rather than concentrating just on traditional disciplines, Malta should reward those players who were achieving results.

Dr Farrugia said it was true, as the MLP was saying, that the fact that Malta was not in the EU had not stopped Malta's football stars from playing in Europe. But what of those who were not stars? Thanks to the present government's agreement with the EU on the free movement of workers, lesser known players would be able to move freely to EU countries to seek contracts with European clubs.

Ms Helena Dalli said this bill would lead to a situation where funds earmarked for sports would be used on administration rather than in the field.

This bill was creating a new sports council instead of the Department of Sport. But experience in other sectors had shown that the replacement of government departments by new bodies had led to a greater financial outlay without improved efficiency. It was therefore better to improve the department than create a new structure.

While the government was saying it wanted to raise sports awareness, it was not complementing this in related sectors. For example, the schools health food policy was not being implemented, and many children ended up eating junk food in school tuck shops after participating in sport.