26 November 2009

The Hon Kate Ellis MP
Minister for Early Childhood Education, Childcare and Youth, Minister for Sport
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600

Dear Minister

THE CRAWFORD REPORT

As you know the Australian Olympic Committee (AOC) is considering the report of the Independent Sport Panel (Panel) on ‘The Future of Sport in Australia’ (Report).

Study Group

Detailed consideration is being given to the Report by a Study Group, formed by the AOC, whose members include senior representatives from the peak bodies, National Federations (NFs), Institutes of Sport and Olympic and Paralympic athletes. A list of the Study Group members is attached.

Following recommendations from the Study Group, the AOC will formalise a response to the Report and present that response to the Prime Minister and yourself as soon as possible.

This Letter

The purpose of this letter is to raise with you the AOC’s complaints about certain contents of the Report and the process taken by the Panel in the preparation of the Report. The complaints should be understood in the context of the policy or direction the Government seeks to develop for Australian sport.

The Report has been released for public comment and debate. The AOC has made vocal criticism in the media about a number of aspects of the Report. The Panel has responded to that criticism, Mr Crawford in particular, by saying that the AOC’s reaction has been seen to be ‘hysterical’.

The AOC wishes to record its position that it seeks to engage in fair and robust debate about these issues based on the information available to the AOC and without focusing on the individual members of the Panel except where the AOC believes there is a legitimate reason to do so.

Preparation of the Report

On 6 May 2008, prior to the Beijing Games, the Government issued its directions paper ‘Australian Sport: Emerging Challenges, New Directions’. The two key areas in which the Government sought to introduce reform was:

1. The way the Government supports elite sport; and
2. The manner in which it uses sport to boost participation and physical activity to help build a healthier nation.

As part of that directions paper, the Government made clear that it not only had to meet the emerging challenges but ‘maintain our status as one of the world’s greatest sporting nations’. The paper promised that further detailed conversations would take place with each stakeholder, which expressly included the AOC.

Two parts of that paper are now particularly significant - the part identifying ‘The Importance of Sport’ which noted that ‘sport is integral to Australia’s way of life, our view of ourselves and how we are viewed by the rest of the world’; and the part identifying the need to ensure Australia’s continued success at elite level.

On 28 August 2008, following the Beijing Games, you issued the Terms of Reference for the appointment of an independent panel to make recommendations ‘on the specific structures, programs and reform required to ensure the continuing robustness of the Australian sport system’ and ‘make particular recommendations about the best way to retain our international standing’.

On 28 August 2008, you also announced the membership of the Panel, appointing Mr Crawford as the Chairman of the Panel, and Ms Sam Mostyn, Ms Pamela Tye, Mr Colin Carter and Mr Mark Bouris as members of the Panel.

On 24 November 2008, the Panel held a meeting with representatives of the AOC to discuss the issues arising under their Terms of Reference. During that meeting I explained the details of the AOC’s sources of revenue, the relationship between the AOC and the Australian Olympic Foundation (AOF), and our support of our member NFs and their athletes through our various programs and funding initiatives (this information is also publicly available on the AOC’s website). The meeting lasted for approximately 1½ hours. By letter dated 20 November 2009 I have requested a record of the meeting which I am still to receive.

On 28 February 2009, the AOC and the Australian Paralympic Committee issued a paper ‘National High Performance for Olympic and Paralympic Sports in Australia’ (High Performance Plan) in which we submitted that an additional $109 million per year on average was required to sustain Australia’s position as a ‘top 5’ medal count nation at the Olympic Games.

On 16 April 2009, the AOC sent a submission to the Panel on the issue of community sport and participation in sport, setting out the AOC’s background and providing information about Olympic Education and the Australian Youth Olympic Festivals.

On 9 May 2009, I delivered the President’s address to the AOC Annual General Meeting and noted the discussions I had with you and the Prime Minister on the High Performance Plan and that you had forwarded a copy of the plan to Mr Crawford. My President’s address is available on the AOC’s website – olympics.com.au.

On 6 August 2009, Gemba Group Pty Limited (‘Gemba’) was contracted by the Department of Health & Ageing to provide information to the Panel regarding governance and commercialisation challenges of Australian sport. An edited version of the Gemba advice dated 19 September 2009 is contained in the Report as Appendix I under the heading ‘Australian Sport: Commercialisation Challenges and Opportunities (Gemba Group)’.

On 15 October 2009, the Panel forwarded its Report to you. According to the Report, the Panel ‘consulted widely and all relevant stakeholders were given the opportunity to participate. In all, the Panel met with or received submissions from over 650 organisations or individuals’.

On 17 November 2009, you released the Report to the public. At the press conference, in which you thanked the Panel for the Report, you indicated that the Government would respond as a priority to the Report and expected to do so early in the New Year.

You also stated that the Government response would identify what it agreed with in the Report and what it might take a different view on. You indicated that the Government was not interested in getting into a divisive debate between elite sport and participation and that ‘each side of those equations was incredibly important’ and what the Government needed to do was ‘make sure that we have the smartest system in place to reach both of those goals’.

Criticism of the Report

The AOC will provide a detailed response to the Report once the Study Group has provided its recommendations. In the meantime, I believe the following criticisms can be made of the Report.

1. The Contents of the Report
   
   (a) Failure to follow the Terms of Reference and the directions paper given by the Government of maintaining our status as one of the world’s greatest sporting nations;
   (b) The introduction of a divisive debate between elite sport and participation, contrary to the Terms of Reference and directions paper given by the Government;
   (c) The attack made on the policy and direction of the Government and sporting bodies because of a lack of data or evidence (which if correct, should have led to a preliminary report with recommendations that such data and evidence be obtained before the Panel was in a position to make any recommendations reasonably). In contrast the Panel made recommendations and findings in the Report where there is a clear lack of data or evidence to support their position;
   (d) Findings which are based on inaccurate information provided to the Panel and in particular the inaccuracy of the information supplied by its expert Gemba.
   
2. Failure to follow a reasonable process:
   
   (a) the lack of time spent by the Panel consulting with the AOC about the issues, particularly given the amount of time spent in consultation with other persons and the amount of space in the Report dealing with Olympic issues;
   (b) the failure to give the AOC an opportunity to respond to issues raised about the AOC or the Olympics or criticisms made about them by others before the Report was published and damaged the AOC’s reputation;
   (c) the lack of time given to the Panel’s expert Gemba to provide advice before publication of the Report and the failure to give the AOC an opportunity to respond to issues raised specifically about the AOC and correct errors contained in their advice before publication of the Report.
   (d) The instructions given to Gemba by the Panel as well as the full version of the Gemba Report should have been contained in the Report and should now be disclosed publicly so that these matters can be understood and discussed as part of the debate. I request a copy of the full version of the Gemba Report and the instructions given to Gemba.
   
3. Lack of independence of the Panel:
   
   (a) the Panel appears to have had an inherent bias by reason of experience with AFL and appears to have had a lack of genuine independence, particularly when Mark Bouris withdrew;
   (b) query whether the Panel members disclosed to the Government the extent of their connections with various sports prior to or at the time of their appointment (letter of 24 November to the Minister awaiting response);
   (c) query whether prior to or at any time after its appointment did Gemba disclose to you or the Panel what association it had with any particular sporting bodies and if so when and what disclosure was made;
   (d) the content of the Report dealing with AOC or Olympic issues suggests a prejudicial agenda to the AOC not displayed in the Terms of Reference and not one would expect from an independent and objective Panel.

Yours sincerely

JOHN D COATES

cc Dr Andrew Southcott MP, Shadow Minister for Employment Participation, Training & Sport
Ms Jane Halton, Secretary, Department of Health and Ageing
Mr David Crawford AO, Chairman, Independent Sports Panel
Ms Sam Mostyn, Member, Independent Sports Panel
Mrs Pam Tye AM, Member, Independent Sports Panel
Mr Colin Carter, Member, Independent Sports Panel

Please click on the following links referred to in the above letter:

Study Group to Consider Crawford Report

Letter to Minister Ellis on 24 Nov 2009 re:Independence of Sport Panel

Letter to David Crawford on 20 Nov 2009 re:AOC information used for the Report