More speeches

Press Conference - The Future of Sport Report, 17 November 2009

Parliament House Canberra
11am, Tuesday 17 November 2009

Minister for Sport Kate Ellis and Chairman of the Independent Sport Panel David Crawford

Kate Ellis: I would like to particularly welcome Mr David Crawford, who chaired up the Independent Sport Panel, who have been looking into the structures and systems governing Australian sport.

The reason he has been doing that is because we, as a government, believe in the importance of sport. We know how important it is to our nation, as well as to our community, which is why we've undertaken this process, is because we actually want to strengthen the position of sport within the Australian community well into the future.

So we appointed an independent review panel to undertake what has been the biggest review of Australian sport in well over a decade. We did this for two key reasons: the first one is that there have been emerging underlying challenges facing Australian sport, particularly at an elite and international level, for some time now, and we were of the view that we cannot carry on complacently letting the rest of the world get closer and closer and catching up.

This needs to be addressed if Australia is going to retain our reputation, our very proud reputation, as being a leader when it comes to international elite sport.

We also did this for a second reason, and that is because it's become really clear that as a nation we haven't been doing all that we can to harness the power of sport when it comes to playing a key role in the health of our community, in tackling obesity and preventable diseases, and playing a key role when it comes to preventative health; and we as a government believe that this needs to change.

Because the truth is there is an incredible power within Australian sport, and we need to tap into that power to deliver all of the positive benefits that sport can bring to our community.

So rather than sticking our heads in the sand, we took the decision that we needed to ensure that we are prepared to meet the challenges of the future with a comprehensive analysis of our sporting system and structures, not just at the highest elite levels but also right down at junior sport and community sport levels.

So there are some things in this report which I suspect may ruffle some feathers. To that I am going to say two things: firstly that these remain recommendations at this point, recommendations which we are today committing to swiftly respond to; but secondly, that we undertook this process because we believe that sport is important and because we believe it's important to Australia that we're prepared to work hard to protect Australian sport into the future.

Now, it is a comprehensive report. I am sure you've all got your head around it. I know some have had more time than others, which I had nothing to do with Mr Lewis, but it is a comprehensive report of businessman David Crawford and his team. It is a product of consultation with over 650 groups and individuals across the full spectrum of Australian sport.

And I want to just talk very briefly, first of all, about what's not in the report. Despite some reports, this report does not recommend a cut to the overall sports budget, it does not recommend a cut to the elite sports budget, and it does not recommend for the Australian Sports Commission to be moved into the Department of Health and Ageing.

That was pure speculation and it is not backed up in the recommendations contained within this report, nor have there ever been recommendations contained within the report to that effect.

But I will now just briefly touch on some of the recommendations which are in there, before I am going to hand over to Mr Crawford, who is going to go through in more detail what they've come up with and the reasons behind it.

The report features 39 recommendations. One of them is for the first ever comprehensive national sports policy framework, a truly national and innovative approach to developing sports policy at both an elite and a community level, which covers Federal Government structures, State Government structures and working directly with our sporting organisations.

In terms of bold reforms, the report recommends revolutionising the Australian Institute of Sport and its relationship with our state and territory institutes, which we know have been the backbone of our elite sports system in this country for so long.

The report recommends becoming an integrated and truly national class system for our athletes of state and territory institutes, and the Australian Institute of Sport, combining to work in cooperation.

For the first time, the panel also recommends a broadening of the definition of success in Australian sport to include measures of our nation's fitness and of participation rates in sport, as well as our achievements on the international stage. And there is a range of recommendations around strengthening community sport, around strengthening participation.

These range from a focus on physical activity and education in our schools, to looking at ways that we can broaden our participation base through innovative and flexible activities and through a major investment in sporting infrastructure, both in facility and in human volunteer terms.

And at that point, I should probably add that we have just recently placed the largest single injection in community sporting infrastructure of an Australian government ever, with $300 million under the stimulus package being devoted to community sporting initiatives.

This report does raise some tough issues and puts forward some tough questions which challenge us to build a sporting system from the grassroots up; a sporting vision that incorporates national planning for elite and for community sport on a scale which has never been implemented in Australia before.

As a government, we're not interested in making change for changes sake. At the same time, we recognise that there are important recommendations in this report that deserve our careful consideration. So we will be considering these recommendations and responding to them as a priority.

I would like to today, however, just reiterate on the record that the Rudd Government has stated on numerous occasions that we are committed to being strong financial partners with Australian sport and with Australian elite sport, and this report does not change that position.

We have absolutely no intention of walking away from elite sport, and instead what we want to do is work to strengthen the overall health of our sports sector. That's why we've undertaken this process.

So as I've already indicated, the Government will respond as a priority to this report. To provide sports with certainty, it's expected that we will provide policy direction early in the New Year, and then of course there are some recommendations which may need to be further considered in the light of the 2010/2011 budget.

So I would like to take this opportunity to thank the panel, David and Colin, who joins with us as well today, for all of their hard work. And I am going to hand over to David to outline in more detail some of the recommendations. Thank you.

David Crawford: Thank you very much, Minister. And I too thank Colin Carter, who was a member of the panel and worked tirelessly with the other members of the panel on this review.

The Minister's done a pretty good job in picking out the highlights. I will try and not repeat them. But as you are all aware, the terms of reference for the panel were very broad, and the panel consulted widely and spoke with in excess of 600 institutions and individuals and had the opportunity of gaining their input. Many issues were raised, many problems identified, many suggestions made, and it is clear that there's a lot to be done.

It's apparent that while significant gains were achieved in the way in which elite sport was administered post the 1976 Olympics, the world has changed, and there is a need to readdress our goals and aspirations at both the elite and the participatory level, taking account of economic and demographic changes, immigration and resultant new cultures, population shifts, rural to urban, and the changing nature of sport and physical activity itself.

The panel formed the view, after having all of those submissions and considering the terms of reference, that it is not possible to address all of, and make recommendations about, the multitude of issues that were presented.

But the panel is firmly of the view that there are a limited number of fundamental issues which, if addressed, will make a difference and provide the basis to ensure the Australian sporting system remains prepared for future challenges at both the elite and participatory and community levels.

The recommendations address the must do initiatives, and are interdependent in the sense that they may include issues relating to continuing success at the elite or participatory level, social inclusion, preventative health, pathways or funding.

But the panel believes that these issues must be addressed if Australia is to continue to be successful at the elite level, all Australians are able to participate in their sport and sports of choice, and the health and wellbeing of our citizens is improved.

And part and parcel of our recommendation is that the panel fundamentally believes if the right structure and governance is put in place, there is every chance for a successful future for Australian sport. But without the right structure and governance, success will not result.

Our report is defined, it is divided up into two parts. In the first part we have identified the eight key issues that we believe need to be addressed. And the first one relates to defining our national sports vision.

Australia does not have a national sports policy or vision. We have no agreed definition of success and what it is we want to achieve. And we lack a national policy framework within which objectives for Government funding can be set and evaluated. But the panel does endorse a broad definition of Australia's sporting success.

In chapter two we talk about reforming the Australian Sports Commission to lead the sports system. We believe that if the Australian sports system is to work well and deliver on the ambition of a national sports strategy, it needs a leader for the whole sports system - that's elite and grassroots - a generator of ideas, projects and innovations across the sector; a problem solver helping to solve the big problems facing sport; and an advisor to Government on sports policy and standards.

We talk about merging our institutes of sport. And the key recommendation there is for the AIS to be separated from the Australian Sports Commission and then to be merged with the SIS/SAS into a single body to form the Australian Institutes of Sport.

This organisation should have its own governing body and a charter to deliver high performance outcomes. And this arrangement should ensure a national approach, eliminating the current issues around coordination, cooperation and competition.

The fourth chapter deals with the very important issue of building the capacity of our national sporting organisations. We believe that the national sporting organisation should have the primary responsibility for development of their own high performance programs, and that they should place engagement of recreational participation as a key priority, and that this focus should be backed by Government policy.

A very important issue we addressed was that of putting sport and physical activity back into education. And it's time once again to make sport and physical education a priority in our education system.

Throughout the work of the panel, the need to reunite sport and education emerged as one of the strongest consistent themes. We address the need for the building of community sport with people and places.

The infrastructure of community sport, made up of both people and facilities, is under threat. The supply of volunteers, often the life blood of any club or association, is under pressure. And there is no coherent approach to building community sports and physical facilities that are needed.

We address the question of ensuring Australia's sports system is open to all. If sport contributes to the nation's health and community cohesion, a key task for the sports policy makers and administrators is to address the factors, and in some cases the barriers, that prevent participation.

Across our communities we are experiencing significant lifestyle changes and pressures which must be understood in the context of encouraging greater participation in sport and physical activity. The panel identified nine areas which must be a focus of the strategic work to be done by the reformed Australian Sports Commission.

And finally, in chapter eight, we talked about sustaining the funding base for sport. We make the point that there is a strong case for increased government funding for sport. But how much should be spent on sport will largely depend on consideration of issues beyond the panel's scope.

The justification for government funding lies largely in achieving elite success in international events, and in the health and community inclusion benefits that derive from community participation in sport.

And as the Minister said quite clearly, our recommendations are that the Government should maintain sport funding at current levels and should consider supplementing this funding on the basis of agreed targets and performance and participation outlined in the proposed national sports policy framework.

The second part of the report, entitled Assessment and Findings, provides more details of the information considered by the panel. It contains many matters raised for future consideration. In this part, it is recognised that it isn't appropriate to believe one size fits all. Accordingly, there will need to be judgement applied in particular circumstances in addressing these matters by those charged with the responsibility for implementation.

It became clear to the panel and confirmed by many submissions that without implementing these changes Australia will fall further behind in our standing in elite sport, the health and wellbeing agenda for our citizens will not be progressed it should, and the general level of participation in sport and physical activity will continue its downward spiral. Thank you.

Kate Ellis: Just stay here for some questions David.

Question: Minister, you're not making a response today, but the key issue which the Government now faces is this question of the funding imbalance which the review talks about and suggests that more emphasis is placed on sports that are popular, and it goes through a range of those sports.
Do you agree to that as a general principle, that the funding emphasis should be on those sorts of sports that are popular with Australians?

Kate Ellis: Well I agree that we're not responding to these recommendations today, and we will be doing that shortly. I also, I tell you I agree with two things when it comes to how we should be dedicating our sports funding.

One is that when it comes to elite international competition, we should be doing things better and smarter, and that the panel have recommended some ways that we should investigate doing that.

But the other key thing is that we actually have an amazing opportunity to use sport to get our kids off the couch and to get them out there running and jumping and being active, which is doing an incredible service for our health system if we do that.

They are things I think we need to be investigating ways that we can use these recommendations to ensure that our sports budget achieves those two goals, and they're both important goals. One of the things that we always do any time we have a review of sport or a discussion about sport, is it gets into quite a divisive argument at times between elite sport and participation.

Well, the Government has said we're not interested in divisive debates. We think each side of those equations are incredibly important, and what we need to do is make sure that we've got the smartest system in place to reach both of those goals.

Question: But you set this review up more than a year ago to look at the entire sports funding issue. It now - the Crawford Review says it makes little strategic sense for the continuing bias towards playing Olympic sports. Do you agree with that as a general principle?

Kate Ellis:Well, as I said, we'll be responding with what we agree with and what we might take a different view on&

Question: &on that as a driving principle. I mean that is fairly key.

Kate Ellis: Well, I think that that is taken slightly out of context in that point. I understand that it's there, Steve, and I also understand what's above it and what's below it as well.

My view is that when it comes to elite sport and Australia succeeding on the international stage, that that is incredibly important. And I've said time and time again that this Government remains committed to being strong financial partners with our Olympic sports movement and with our Olympians.

I think it's incredibly important when it comes to Australia's reputation overseas, but it's also incredibly important to our national morale and it's important for setting up role models for our kids and for the rest of the community to aspire to do.

That's my views on the importance of elite sport. We have no plans whatsoever to walk away from that. At the same time, we are saying that there are important roles that sport can play within the community that we need to maximise. Sport and physical activity should be a key part of the preventative health agenda.

We should be doing more to support community sport, to support junior athletes, and to support community clubs and volunteers. So these are all recommendations which we will be closely considering and responding to very shortly.

Question: Isn't there a problem fundamentally with the emphasis on elite sports, if the issue is obesity? Since Montreal we didn't get any gold medals, we've got a lot more gold medals since. We've also had obesity has climbed enormously in that same amount of time. So there is no nexus between elite success and getting kids fit and active.

Shouldn't this just go to [indistinct] and isn't this an opportunity for the total emphasis to swing behind participation and particularly the involvement of kids?

Kate Ellis: I think that this is a really exciting opportunity to make sure that our sport system is strong and healthy from the grassroots community sport right through to elite sport. And as I said, we believe that both ends of that spectrum are incredibly important. We have no intention of walking away from either.

But we as a government made clear when our first Act in the sport portfolio when we came into government was to move sport within health. That send a very clear message about the role that we believe that sport can play and the power that we believe sport can have within the community to deliver on a range of different policy objectives, from health to education to community building.

There are important recommendations in here about the role of sport in multiculturalism, in bringing communities together in overcoming a range of different levels of disadvantage. Do I think that these opportunities have been overlooked previously in the national sport system? Yes, I do, and they are things that we will be considering in our response to the report.

Question: I've got a question for Mr Crawford. During this process there was a great deal of public debate about the idea of a HECS style scheme for graduates of the AIS, partly prompted by the minister himself. Can you explain why that was ruled out?

David Crawford:Yes, we looked at it and we put the explanation as to why we ruled it out in the report, but just to summarise, we did look at it. HECS is a totally different system from that which was considered for the recovery from the sporting people. HECS is a recovery relative to lifetime income from the profession that one has studied for and for which you are making a repayment.

Sport is often in a situation where the people who participate in elite sport finish that sport probably at an early age, let me pick 30, they don't have a lifetime in that sport and they frequently don't have a great income from participating in that sport.

There are significant contributions that are made to funding a sportsperson, whether it be through state bodies, whether it be through Commonwealth bodies, whether it be through national sporting organisations which indirectly are funds from either the State or Commonwealth.

So very complicated to be able to measure that and to arrange for a recovery. This issue has been looked at at least twice before. We had the benefit of looking at the recommendations that came out of those previous recommendations and we adopted those. However, we have said in our report that this is something that should be kept on the agenda by the revised ASC.

Question: Minister, is there any more funding for grassroots sports clubs?

Kate Ellis: Well, obviously there are some recommendations to ensure that we are enhancing community sport and making sure that community sport and grassroots sporting clubs are a healthy part of the system as well, and those recommendations will be responded to swiftly.

Question: Another of the recommendations was that physical education be part of the national curriculum, at the latest in the second phase, to be implemented in 2012. Do you think that Australian schools are currently neglecting sport and physical education?

Kate Ellis:I think that - my view is that there is an incredibly exciting opportunity for us to look at the role of sport within the education system. I believe that we can also look at the role of sporting infrastructure within the education system in our schools and universities, and these are things which we will be obviously responding to in our swiftly coming response to the recommendations.

But it is, the role of sport within the national curriculum is something which has been discussed previously. It's something that state and territory sports ministers have also expressed some interest in, and we will be having some further conversations both within government and with our state and territory colleagues in the response to these recommendations.

Question: Can I just ask Mr Crawford, the report recommends or says that there is no evidence that major sporting events encourage participation in sport. Does that mean that Australia should not be bidding for the soccer World Cup?

David Crawford: No, the report says exactly what you said; that there was no evidence that major sporting events necessarily encourage participation. However, one might look at what happened last weekend with the national masters tournament, where we in fact had huge turn up to see Tiger Woods.

Now the question is, is that ever going to convert itself into having more people play golf, or were the hundreds of thousands of people who turned up there just wanting to see the best exponent of golf probably that the world has ever known?

Question: Minister, can I just ask you to clarify? You say the Government will be swiftly responding to these recommendations. The AOC and other sporting groups have been critical of the timing of this announcement. But in order to end that uncertainty, when will the Government be putting out its response? Will it be prior to next year's budget?

Kate Ellis: I'm glad you raised that question because I just want to say something on the timing. That when we announced this review, when we announced the appointment of the independent expert panel, we outlined timeframes, and what we said was that the report would be handed to Government in the second half of this year, which it has been, and that we expect to respond to it at the end of the year. So we're very keen to respond to the policy recommendations within the report early next year.

Question: Sorry, just to clarify, early next year?

Kate Ellis: Yes.

Question: So the timeframe has slipped? You did say&

Kate Ellis: Well, early next year is at the end of the year.

Question: Sorry? Early next year?

Kate Ellis: Well, if you get to the end of the year is when we said we would be expecting to respond, and what I'm saying today is that we will be responding to these policy recommendations early in the New Year.

Question: So February, March, April?

Kate Ellis: No. Well, early.

Question: Well, presumably not January.

Question: It's suggesting we see now top eight finishes as a success. Do you think that's an attitude change Australians can come to terms with? I mean we want to win and do we need to, you know, give a gold medal for every participant?

Kate Ellis: Well, David might want to respond to why they made that particular assessment?

David Crawford: One has to look at what your definition of success is. And in the Olympic Games, which are the premier athletic event in the world, a view has come that top five and then maybe top six was appropriate for our standing in the community.

I think that the realistic answer is as other countries are progressing up the sporting scale, as other countries are spending more and more money than we could ever afford, and as other countries with their much larger populations improve their performance, it's probably unrealistic for us to consider trying to match them both in the spending amount and in the performance to achieve a top five finish.

We're posing the question that one should ask what is your definition of success, what are you trying to achieve through your policy, and then set appropriate targets.

Question: Minister, are you prepared as Minister to see Australia drop out of the top five in the Olympic medal tally?

Kate Ellis: Well, I think that the challenges which are facing our Olympians and our elite international athletes are one of the very reasons why we need to find ways to do things better and smarter, and we need to embrace the necessary reform, because I for one, as a proud Australian, love seeing our elite athletes do well on the international stage.

I think it's important and it's something that we want to see continue. So of course we want to see Australians maximising their results at international sporting meets, just as we want to see sport used right throughout the community as well.

David Crawford: I wonder if I could just amplify that comment and my previous comments, because I think it is important, that if one looks at medals as the measure of success it's interesting to note where those medals are earned.

Most of them are earned in individual sports. For example, a team of hockey players is a team, but there's only one medal counted for the gold, and that applies for male and female of course, and that applies across all of the team sports. So we need to ask ourselves why is it or what is the appropriate measure of the number of medals that we should be aspiring to?

Question: So on that question, you would see Australia dropping out of the top five? Is that likely?

David Crawford: I think we should be - the Government needs to address where it wants to succeed, in what sports it wants to succeed, and then set the targets accordingly.

And there may well be some sports where we would want to be in the top two or three in the world, particularly say in some of those team sports. But there may be other sports where we don't see it as being a sport which is, if you like, native to or generally played or participated in by Australians, where we feel outside that level.

Question: So basically you think the medal tally shouldn't be the be all and end all of everything?

David Crawford: The medal tally should not be. We say this very clearly. We don't think that that's the necessarily the appropriate definition of success for elite sport. And while we're talking about elite sport of course, we shouldn't be just talking about Olympics sports. We are in the top three of team sports around the world in sports that aren't Olympic sports.

So we need to look at the sports where we participate on the world stage but they're not Olympic sports. We need to look at those sports where we participate only on the national stage where there may not be an international competition but where truly we are at the very top level in performance.

Question: Minister, on the World Cup, do we have the facilities to host something like the football World Cup? And would the Government look at any funding to regional stadiums, such as Wynne Stadium in Wollongong which is basically falling apart?

Kate Ellis:We've made it clear from the outset of the World Cup bid that this will be a bid that is put forward by the Australian Government working in partnership with the State and Territory Governments, and of course led by the Football Federation of Australia.

We're currently in discussions and cooperation with the states and territories, and we're confident that if Australia does win a World Cup bid that we will have the infrastructure in place to ensure that it's a great success.

Question: Will that mean more funding to upgrade the stadiums in places such as Newcastle and Wollongong that are struggling to keep their facilities together?

Kate Ellis:Look, I think that there are a range of regional stadiums in New South Wales, in particular, where there are excellent facilities, that there is a possibility of them being upgraded.

Of course, we are working in partnership with the States and with the Territory Governments who are looking at the infrastructure within their particular regions and where their priorities lie in that area, and we're working very hard to try and win the bid so that we can have many more of these discussions about where the host venues will be.

Question: Minister the AOC and the national sporting organisations are I think asking for $100 million extra.

Kate Ellis: I think it was 110, yep.

Question: One hundred and ten million. Are you going to be in there fighting through the Cabinet and budgetary process to try and achieve an increase in funding? Do you think there's any prospect, given the very tight budgetary framework which [indistinct] was talking about on Sunday? Do you think there's any chance of an increase in funding of achieving some of what the AOC and others are seeking?

Kate Ellis: You might be shocked to know that I am not going to talk about what may or may not be in next year's budget. What I will say is that we've said on the record that we intend to be strong financial partners going forward, and we stick with that commitment.

Question: Maybe some prospect of extra funding?

Kate Ellis: We stick with the commitments which we have made on the record. At the same time, I say that we welcome that this report has looked at ways that we can do things better and smarter to get greater results when it comes to elite sport, and I think that that's incredibly important.

I guess I would just say finally that I've been in this job for two years now; I think I'm yet to meet a sporting organisation who doesn't want more funds. So I wouldn't be shocked by the fact that the Australian Olympic Committee believe that the best response to the position of Australian sport is greater funding for Olympic sports. I don't think that's a particularly shocking revelation.

Question: Minister, have you told FIFA that the NRL and AFL will not be shutting down if the World Cup were to be held in Australia for a period?

Kate Ellis:Look, I think that we need to all take a deep breath when it comes to the role of the other codes and the FIFIA World Cup bid. I'm really happy that the other codes have agreed to work in cooperation with our bidding process going forward.

I've been in regular contact with those other codes and we intend to work in cooperation with them to find a way through. We've said from the outset when we announced the World Cup bid that this would be tough and that there would be some big issues and some challenges.

We're not shying away from that, but we are saying that we believe that we have the will, and we have a good prospect of going forward, putting forward a successful bid and working in cooperation with the other codes as to what the solution will be during that time in Australia in either 2018 or 2022.

Question: Mr Crawford, going to your vision in the report, what does it mean for the existing AIS? Is that still going to be the premium place for athletes or are they going to evolve out to the various states and territories?

David Crawford: What we said is that the AIS should be revamped and be, if you like, the policy administrator; it's not to be a provider of services. And the provider of services to elite athletes will be provided through the combined Institutes of Sport.

Question: Mr Crawford, you say here that the panel could find no evidence of high profile sporting events like the Olympics, Wimbledon and the AFL grand final have a material influence on sports participation. So therefore you say priority should be given to those sports played throughout the country and engage participants through their lifetimes. Can you be specific what sports you are talking about that you think should deserve high priority?

David Crawford: Well, again we specified where the funding is currently allocated, and we made the observation that I think water polo receives more funding than golf, bowls and tennis combined. And if you look at the number of participants in golf, tennis and bowls, compared with the participants in water polo, you see a significant difference in the funding levels.

We addressed the issue of participation both from a sporting perspective but also from a preventative health agenda. And many of those sports like tennis, golf and bowls are lifetime sports and they receive minimal funding. And we ask the question, is this appropriate or should government be addressing this in the context both of sport and the preventative health agenda?

Question: I wonder, Mr Crawford, that in your, in the panel's view, that we can longer, looking into the future, how long you can continue to fund the array of sports in the way that they're currently funded at. There needs to be a streamlining of funding towards sports that are either high participation or better representative, in your view, of what represents a national sporting identify, national psyche is?

David Crawford: No, we don't make that broad suggestion because we don't have sufficient evidence to be able to make those recommendations. What we do say - and we think it's very important - that before you can start saying whether a level of funding is appropriate, you need to have a sports policy, a sports vision and a strategy for implementing it.

And a fundamental part of that is defining what it is you're wanting to achieve through that policy. Once you've defined that, you are then in a position to make allocations.

Question: [inaudible question]

David Crawford:It depends upon the size of the pocket, and I don't control the pocket.

Kate Ellis: Any more questions?

Question: Minister, can I just ask you, do you accept there will be winners and losers under the Crawford Review's preferred model

Kate Ellis: Well, the first thing I'd say is the Crawford Review has come up with a series of recommendations; that's what they remain at the moment. But of course, if you - sport is something that people in Australia feel so incredibly passionately about, that there will be people that passionately agree with any proposed reform and there will be people that passionately disagree.

There will be people that perceive themselves to be in the winning category and perhaps people that might perceive themselves to be in the losing category. What I will say to that is these are recommendations and that we intend to go and speak directly with those sports, directly with the states and with other stakeholders before making our very swift response.

Question: You have to make a decision at some point. As you say, every sporting body wants more money. At some stage you are going to have to bite the bullet and go to some sporting organisations and say you're going to get less money; there are going to be losers that come out of this as well as winners. Is that not simply stating the obvious?

Kate Ellis: I don't think that's inevitable. The other thing I should say on sports funding is that there are a number of key major sports which were given their four year indicative funding levels earlier this year. So in terms of the discussion around uncertainty, our major Olympic sports have been given their minimum funding levels, indicative from the Australian Sports Commission, to take them well past the London Olympics as well.

Question: With elite sports, if they're not going to be cut back, but elite sports that receive lots of corporate funding and can pay their top players million dollar salaries, why should they be spared the budget cuts?

Kate Ellis: Well, one of the terms of reference for the panel was to look at ways of diversifying the funding base for Australian sport. And Tory mentioned an issue which was flagged on that esteemed website, The Punch, around looking at ways that there might be means to recoup funding through very, very exceptionally successful athletes.

What the panel has suggested is that we look at the Australian Sports Foundation, which currently exists as a body in order to get corporate donations and feed them back into Australian sport. And there is a recommendation that we need to look at moving the structures of the Sports Foundation to perhaps increase its role and its effectiveness at being able to do that.

And I'd be very interested in exploring ways that we can work with corporate Australia, as well as with of course government funding and bodies like the Australian Olympic Committee, to ensure that there is a diverse funding base from Australian sport.
I say that whilst once again saying this is not an attempt to try and walk away from funding sport; we've made it very clear that we want to remain strong financial partners. And we're going to have to go at that point.

ENDS

More speeches