Why do we hold separate Paralympic and Olympic events? (UCL)

Uploaded by UCLTV on 17.08.2012

>> Thank you.
Thank you all very much for coming out in
such great numbers for this discussion.
My name is Nick Tyler and I,
for once in my various [inaudible] one
of the things I do is I run a center for national health
and well-being at UCL called Crucible Centre which is
about multidisciplinary research and education relating
to oddly enough lifelong health and well-being.
And it always-- has been--
struck me for a long time about this sort of question
about how we see disability and other things in society and one
of this examples of that which is very topical
at the moment is the question of the difference
between the Olympic games and the Paralympic games.
And it's interesting to do this here
in University College London
because there is a sort of a piece of ethos.
It's actually quite important.
They found this of UCL wanted to change university education
and study and the way of thinking in order
that education should become available to everybody.
Let all come who merit deserves the best reward.
That is quite similar in a way to the sort of faster, higher,
stronger motto of the International Olympic Committee.
And it so strikes me that--
that somehow rather there's a little bit of a disconnect
between that sort of idea and some of the ways
in which we actually behave.
And so one thing is back to the original 1948 approach
by Sir Ludwig Guttmann when he basically set up a,
some games for his patients
at Stoke Mandeville Hospital during the course
of the Olympic Games.
And 12 years later that turned
into him taking 400 wheelchair athletes to their own Olympics;
to run what he called the parallel Olympics
and that's the beginning of the term of Paralympics.
By 1992, there were some 3,500 athletes from 82 countries
of Barcelona Olympics and this year in London,
we're expecting 4,200 athletes from a 165 countries.
So the issue of Paralympic sport has become actually something
which I believe is now very much in the mainstream.
So we have invited speakers here,
4 speakers who have very different slants
on this question.
The first is Dr. David Howe, who is a Senior Lecturer
in Anthropology of Sport at Loughborough University.
He is a Paralympian.
We have Professor Nora Groce from UCL from the--
she is the Director of Leonard Cheshire Disability
and Inclusive Development Centre.
We have Mark Dyer who is the Accessible Transport Manager
for the London 2012 Olympic Delivery Authority,
local I guess.
And we have Dan Brooke who is the Chief Marketing
and Communications Officer at Channel 4.
So, the way that's I was sort of planning to run this is
that I've asked each speakers to prepare a sort
of 5-ish minute talk or sort of pitch if you
like on their response to the question why should,
why do we hold separate Paralympic
in the Olympic events.
And then we may have some sort
of clarification session amongst the panel
and then we will open the floor to people in the audience
to place their comments and ask questions of the panel.
So first off, I'd like to ask David Howe to kick us off.
Thank you [inaudible]
>> Thank you.
Thank you very much.
When I woke up this morning like many of you,
my clock radio alarm went off
and I heard immediately, London 2012 is over.
Now that the whole idea of that based on why we're here
to discuss the relationship
between the International Olympic Committee
and the International Paralympic Committee is hugely problematic.
As the first speaker today, I want to endeavor to rather
than just simply put my point across,
I want to ask some pertinent questions of the rest
of the panel but also of the audience as well
to sort of ignite the debate.
And there are 3 or 4 key issues that need
to be brought to the fore I think.
And one of these issues is the idea of legacy.
And since 2004, the IOC and the whole bidding process
for the Olympics and Paralympic games has resonated
with this idea of having some sort
of legacy left after a games.
But legacy is hugely problematic.
It is a concept in my belief that is made
for and by politicians.
It's very, very hard to pin down.
And I think of the mother superior in the sound of music
when she's talking about Maria
and how do you hold the moonbeam in your hands.
The idea of social legacy which is the important thing to me,
it doesn't matter whether Tottenham
or another football team gets the use
of the stadium after the games.
What is the social legacy for people with impairments
in the United Kingdom
for hosting the Paralympic games is really, really a problem--
is really, really a problem
and the other things that's been drawn to my attention
and something that I've written about recently.
So I wonder if this debate is really a reflection
of the exploits of one athlete.
Oscar Pistorius, the Paralympic athlete that everyone
around the world knows, the blade runner, bilateral,
below the knee amputee who successfully managed
to gain selection into the Olympics.
If it is Oscar Pistorius the reason we're having this debate
there are issues that need to be raised.
The idea of the super crypt celebrating some impaired bodies
over the others.
And those impaired bodies are often the least marginal
in the Paralympic family.
And that becomes usually problematic
as media attention gets drawn to these individuals at the expense
of severely impaired and more marginalized bodies.
Channel 4 has, it appears at least
from the website put a good mixture
of experienced journalists and importantly,
very importantly people with experience and impairment
on their production team for the games here in London.
But what does the immense media focus of attention
on these games really mean?
Commercialization has in the past shaped the bodies
that now compete in the Paralympic game.
When I first went to the Paralympics
in 1980 there were a lot more opportunities available
for the most severely impaired athletes that were part
of the Paralympic family to engage in a plethora
of sporting opportunities.
Now the most severely impaired individuals have limited
opportunity to show their abilities.
[ Pause ]
These are really, really big issues.
If we are going to combine the Olympics
and the Paralympics we need to be properly inclusive.
And that means and this is something
that probably won't happen.
That means throwing out the rubric that is the Olympic Games
and throwing out the rubric that is the Paralympic games
and coming up with a different paradigm
in which this movement can go forward together.
If we simply accommodate Paralympic athletes
with the Olympic movement you will find
that Paralympic sport becomes more and more marginalized.
I want to leave with a couple of questions.
Why is it people with impairments engaged
in the practice of sport are seen as inspirational?
There was a Facebook group that I'm a member of,
the disabilities for Facebook group
that last night there were loads and loads of mentions
that I can't wait to see the inspirational athletes
at the Paralympic games.
That to me as a former Paralympian can be
considered offensive.
Why is it that somebody that goes about their pursuit
of higher, faster and stronger whether it be
in the Paralympic forum or the Olympic forum is any different?
What is inspirational about impairment?
I just don't see it.
Why do Paralympians, the articulate
and the inarticulate alike parade themselves
as motivational speakers.
Most of these individuals don't have the charisma
to motivate anyone and yet they're up and front
of the able bodied people telling tales
that are inspirational.
And we need to question these things within society at large.
In large part there is nothing ever special about people
with impairments rather we are different.
Paralympians are just the same.
We need to work to establish an understanding of social justice
with difference at its heart.
If the Paralympics continues to follow in the shadow
and it was quite clear this morning that what's happening
of the Olympics this dream
or perhaps it's only my dream will be considerably harder
to achieve.
Thanks very much.
[ Applause ]
>> So I'd like to move on to Mark [inaudible].
[ Pause ]
>> Good evening everyone.
Don't worry it's not the death by Powerpoint
and it's certainly not the opening
or ceremonial closes one either.
I have mixed views
on the closing style of the [inaudible].
It's been an interesting day for me.
I just want to give a bit of my background as well.
I've been working with the Olympic Delivery Authority now
for the last 5 years.
Also we go about 1,758 days and the start
of the games whether its Olympics
or Paralympics was a long time in the future.
What I want to do today is I supposed give my perspective
from all-- not just an individual
but from a work perspective on how the impact we would face
if we combined the Olympics with the Paralympics.
The opportunities it shows but also the challenges.
My first Olympic memories were back in 1980 Moscow
and my heroes were Daley Thompson and Seb Coe.
So you can imagine my excitement
when I was Olympic Delivery Authority and I [inaudible]
with Seb Coe for the first time.
My [inaudible] and then we talked
about the weather everyday.
What I would like to say is even [inaudible] 20 my [inaudible]
acknowledged and the Paralympics was non-existent.
It was there but I cannot [inaudible] a thing about it,
I certainly could have told you anyone who competed obviously
over the last 10 years that's evolved developed
and with people like [inaudible]
and others have become well known figures.
I think [inaudible] an example there
of people now regarded successful in their own rights
as business people, as ambassadors
as was said early aren't just there because they're disabled
but they do have a charisma,
and they do have something to talk about it.
Like all the others here I'm sure have been talking
about people [inaudible] what does integration look like.
There is a couple of key questions I have.
Is it about sharing venues?
So for instance are we going to have events
where you might see hundred meters for wheelchair athletes
and then you might see 100 meters with [inaudible] about--
is it about combining events.
Is it about, do we want to actually integrate events?
Are we talking about athletes competing together?
You ask a story if you like.
And how far does that go and how far could it go?
Or does it mean that it's about having two set
for events running over a course of days condensed together
in one place but maybe using separate venues
as might happen at the moment.
This is another question I face my self asking there.
I suppose my concern is that and this is based
on what we're seeing
at the moment are producing that as one event.
What is the impact to that?
When it draws out the days?
Potentially we have to find a lot more venues.
Do you get visibility of minority sports?
And that doesn't mean just Paralympic sports
but it means Olympics sports as well.
Is there less opportunity for identity, independence?
And I think one thing we do through the Paralympics now,
there is an identity, there is an independence.
Now whether that gets diluted if it gets swallowed
into perhaps the Olympics [inaudible] is something
that I think we have to look at very carefully.
One thing [inaudible] that I found working
with both organizations, Olympic--
and International Olympic Committee,
[inaudible] International Paralympic Committee is firstly
the individuals that sit on that committee are very
different personalities.
They have different values as well.
Now the advantage is you put those two values together,
do you get a stronger brand?
But finally what's the impact with funding and sponsorship
and that's always the challenge and the battle
for the [inaudible] Paralympic Committee fighting
against that larger model of increasing [inaudible]
but if they go together [inaudible] do they become more
minoritized now at the moment.
I'd like to show you just a few quick slides just
to give you a scan of the problem
that [inaudible] facing when I look at it.
These will be issues that come up for me.
So, as you can imagine my role is being fairly extensive
over the last five years.
The last three weeks being particularly extensive
and as I said again earlier the people [inaudible]
in 2012 I think its 7 o'clock this morning I was
in my first Paralympics debriefing
so the good sign is we are moving
on from our side of things.
What I would say is [inaudible] see governance we talked a
little bit about is different.
If we're going to look
at [inaudible] in a bit more detail.
The schedules we have, there are some really key dates there.
We need two weeks in between at the moment
to even make those venues ready.
The great thing is I think we have set a Paralympic
[inaudible] and that's a real positive.
There is a real identity to it.
It will be different again.
A [inaudible] message I think is different doesn't have
to be wrong.
It doesn't have to be the same,
there are different opportunities
to do things differently and I think we also need
to consider it's not just the Paralympics movement.
But there's also other Olympic movements as well
such as Special Olympics
and they should have their own identity as well,
unless there's a way of embodying all those together.
Sports wise we have a lot of sports.
And what I want to point out in that side
of things is [inaudible] is
that if I have got 20 Olympics sports, Paralympics sports
about 21 [inaudible] sessions, 503 events,
[inaudible] ceremonies plus [inaudible] Olympic makes back
[inaudible] a huge problem across the [inaudible]
as you could probably imagine.
Both sports requirements are also different.
There are different needs
for venue requirements, different overlay.
For some events it works very easily.
You're [inaudible] an aquatic center though at Paralympic time
and at Olympic time does have its challenges depending
on how integrated you want the even to look.
[ Pause ]
There is a huge reduction in numbers of athletes?
I think Nick said the figure earlier is
and there is a jump maybe 4,200 to about 7,000 we think
at the moment, 27 wheelchair users.
A huge volume again and how you manage that number of athletes
if you have able bodied athletes [inaudible]
for want of a better word.
Huge amount of equipment, lets give the people equipment
that they need and the attention they need to get
that equipment [inaudible] the best of their performance.
It is very difficult to do that one in a mixed environment.
Likewise, the number of officials,
huge number of officials, we are looking at huge volumes
of people coming to the country
with different access requirements,
with different needs [inaudible] happen as well.
Those are my venues.
You'll be familiar with wheel sizes
as far [inaudible] concerned.
And that is actually these sports [inaudible] themselves.
All those are shared with Olympic sports.
So, it's great thing to fast forward, isn't it?
He is trying to [inaudible] and I don't want to go.
So what we're saying is again, if you're going to talk to this,
I mean in a country or city like London there is a lot
of venues [inaudible] those are only Olypmic,
and Paralympic venues and the only thing is obviously you've
[inaudible] a lot of venues since the football stadium
from the Olympic side of things.
I don't know any city in the world that puts support
in a 5-year program with turnaround
to deliver all the venue requirements we had,
if we happen across that sign, 10 time frame
and not have the opportunity to convert and divert those venues.
What I would say is when those thing is being build is the
first based, the new ones there is a legacy value.
I [inaudible] to point early that legacy is a social binding
but from our side, things-- we need to demonstrate the money
that you spent has a legacy values as well
in [inaudible] environment.
In trying to demonstrate changes in attitudes and values.
And that's really, really difficult to do,
but we are trying to do that and there's--
there were positive signs out there.
We have 70,000 volunteers that should understand a lot
of accessibility in motion than we did before and understand
about peoples diverse needs.
And actually understand that it's a good thing to talk
to people and achieving more which doesn't tend to happen.
As I said those are the venues in a bit more detail.
I don't want to fix [inaudible] at all
but accommodation is another issue we face.
I don't know if people are aware we recognize probably only a
thousand wheelchair accessible hotel rooms in whole of London.
When you think of all the people that come out to the Olympics,
or come for the Paralympics,
you'll see the challenge we have there based
on just not athlete requirement, friends, family, having interest
in the events as well, just combine that all together
at one time is very difficult.
I think the other thing is we're going
to find the media workforce people
with disabilities again is very high.
It's a great thing to see, but meeting those needs,
and those expectations is crucial for us
to ensure the right positive image is what we're trying
to do.
[ Pause ]
The Oscar picture, you have all seen that before I'm sure,
but probably one again is that right?
Bu what I would like to say here is the ticketing prices
is different.
I think there is an opportunity to do this differently.
Why should it be that Paralympic tickets are cheaper
than everyone else in the Olympic Games
when actually demand is just as high?
And likewise while the Olympic tickets are high [inaudible]
accessible for everyone to purchase.
There is a [inaudible] between the two there.
And I think there is an opportunity the way they promote
it that should look at an opportunity to do that.
Again, take [inaudible] is very limited during Olympics time
during Paralympics it is encouraged, encouraged to go
and see [inaudible] encourage to hang out with people,
learn about sports, share an application together.
And I would like to see that as a model I think we can
[inaudible] until it gets more going forward.
For spectators, yes I have it.
I think what we see is a really interesting example obviously
as younger audience who comes to you,
that's right there should be an opportunity.
My concern is does the Paralympic Sports gets one
of the after game-- Things that Olympic brand.
Do young people really get to see that?
Do they get to learn about different sports?
I think what's fascinate is what is retaking off has been handle.
[Inaudible] is what's [inaudible]
because they couldn't actually get tickets for all the staff
and becomes usually popular.
Paralympics is a great way for children to get to see sports,
they wouldn't necessarily see otherwise.
Yeah, I think we all know we're in the place at the moment,
if people got the opportunity, children would have said,
would they rather see [inaudible]
that will be the answer most
of them won't probably give the moment some time.
Again there is opportunity to buy tickets as groups,
get people together, get value as to those tickets as well.
And those are all positive so we should look to try
and [inaudible] going forward.
[Inaudible] is very challenging.
Let's all see what [inaudible] at the moment.
My biggest challenges, people are taking 2 weeks off work.
And London is being quieter
than most people have seen it for years I suspect.
That tell me that 4-weeks time it's going to be busy
as never before as well.
And that causes me a headache.
It causes me an issue that's a lot of people come back--
what mentality or happy days of the sunshine
and the middle wind are gone, people back in work mode.
And when is [inaudible] considerations for other people
with [inaudible] not goes down.
It means exactly managing [inaudible] views,
but actually demand
for [inaudible] are going to be actually huge.
And all services we've got,
are coming on to more stress and more pressure.
We also go to a stage where we get to a point
where we're looking at the actual staff and the volunteers
to try and sustain that for a period
of four weeks [inaudible] is incredibly difficult.
Now I don't want to sound like it's not being fun
but the hours have been hard for a lot of people, a lot harder
for most people, it has been for me.
Could you keep these volunteers sustained
for one block period of time?
Or do people need a break in the middle?
So, businesses need the opportunity to go out
and rewrite that business, take that time away and then comeback
to Paralympics, refresh and all that.
If you do one big block of time I think that isn't very hard
to keep that energy and enthusiasm going
from the workforce, from the volunteers and also
from spectators as a whole.
I think people we have an opportunity to recharge
and re generate towards Paralympics.
But my belief is that it should very much remain
as a separate event with its own identity.
I think what really excites me,
and Dan will show us more than I will.
But we have a very specific brand, the BBC gave us
at the Olympics Games.
And BBC does that kind of thing very well.
I'm excited by the opportunity, I see that channel 4,
slight more, can I say edgy approach?
To me in a sense a more creative approach.
[inaudible] what we see in the build up,
Paralympics can give that.
And that should give everyone an energy,
and enthusiasm going forward, an opportunity
to reevaluate the way they look at games
but also how they look at themselves.
And how they can get involved with the games as well.
I hope today, we get to a position that we can say that,
first thing in London, there is going
to be a successful Paralympics and we've seen that with 2
and a half million tickets being sold already.
That's the good news story.
Let's see if we can take
that for the next, next going forward.
And then my belief, I think we should probably should remain
[inaudible] on that side.
Thank you.
[ Applause ]
>> Thank you very much, now Brooke is here.
I'm very glad to see you here, obviously it's a very busy time.
Nora, would you like to gives us our next [inaudible]
>> All right, I'd be delighted,
and I'm going keep my remarks brief because,
I want to make sure that,
and I haven't prepared PowerPoint because,
I thought you folks probably seen a PowerPoint
on a day to day basis.
I'm just going to speak briefly with the hope
that we can comeback to discussions
in a little bit, and go in that.
This is posed as debate, should we,
or should we not combined Olympics and Paralympics,
and I don't know if we're ready
to really have a discussion of that level yet.
I think that with a discussion debate
like this can do is really kind of, with a highlight key issues,
because we're talking on a number of different levels.
One is historical, so there's a history behind the Olympics,
and the Paralympics and that's-- they started of, you know,
it goes back to the 1940s, and there's an evolution over time,
and it hasn't always been the most straight forward
of evolutions.
So, for example there was, the Atlantic Games was--
and were actually in some ways a step back,
we look at how good it was in terms of preparation,
combination and bringing people together.
There's also organizational issues,
we just had a wonderful discussion of how
as an organization, the Olympics committees can bring together,
and a city, athletes, the Olympics, the Paralympics,
and really see where they mesh.
This is organizational, but there's a theoretical level
as well, and that's really important to think about,
what do we need, whose decision is it whether
to combine the games?
Is it the Olympics Committee?
Is it the group-- groups and the sponsors
who organize these-- these events?
Is it individuals themselves, is it individuals
with disabilities deciding, and having the right
to decide whether they participate in the Paralympics
or the Olympics, or both.
So is it a continuum of options that should be made available
to people with disabilities.
If sports are a form in which people, in order to participate,
qualified by a set of rules, they are arbitrary rules,
but if you can meet those rules, you can run fast enough,
if you could shoot an arrow straight enough,
and with precision enough to be in the Olympics as opposed
to the Paralympics, what does that do to the Paralympics?
They said a two tiered system where some people could opt
out of the Paralympics if they can qualify for the Olympics,
and if so, who makes the decision
of who should participate where.
And do we need to make that decision or should we leave it
to the individual athletes.
And finally, over time will this as things change and develop,
is this a discussion that we should be having
or is this something that the organizations
that organize these games will decide on their own,
without the input of the disability rights movement,
of people who are active in issues
of equality and fair play.
How do we manage this process in a way
that it reflects the needs, and the voice of people
with disabilities themselves, and of athletes themselves?
And finally, to me as someone
who is not particularly a sports person,
one thing that strikes me about the Olympics is,
that we are talking about elite athletes.
And the question also is how do you draw people
with this is like, you think if it as a tree
with the elite athletes on top, and all the capillaries,
all the roots that would bring people in, bring children in,
bring young people in, bring all the people in, to enjoy sports,
and to appreciate both the games,
and also to participate themselves need
to be something that's accessible to people
with disabilities so that they have that choice.
And we often talk about the very top of the tree
without really discussing what it means to have a whole system
in place to get people involved and enjoying sports,
whether they are able body, or they are,
they have a physical disability, or intellectual disability.
How do we setup a system that has--
we were talking about legacy, how do we think
about that legacy in a way that it's not just the elite athlete,
but that elite athlete may reflect thousands, or hundreds
and thousands of others who can enjoy sports,
who can enjoy watching sports, and who can get a lot
out of individual participation.
So maybe let me stop there.
If I have no answers that's because I don't know
if there are any answers.
But, I think that it's very important
to ask questions, along in this realm.
>> Thank you very much.
[ Applause ]
>> Hello everyone thank you very much to Leonard Cheshire
for asking me to come and speak
to what is undoubtedly a fascinating
and I believe quite complex question
and I should establish upfront my professional hinterland is
neither in sport nor in the world of disability.
And though as we would--
as I was discussing with the other panelists before my
brother was a talented athlete.
It was a field of life in which he excelled so high,
higher level than me as in many other levels of life I speak
as a middle child [laughter].
And I-- but having said that I--
what I might do if you would indulge me is
to just take a slightly self interested approach
in the first part of my remarks and just say some things about,
about Channel 4 and the nature
of our involvement with the Paralympics.
And to do that I need to start
by little bit explaining what Channel 4 is.
So, we're a state owned public service broadcaster
and we have a very specific public service remit
which is given to us by Parliament which has a range
of different obligations within it and they include to innovate
in the sphere of television, to reflect the cultural diversity
of the UK, to champion alternative voices and points
of view and to nurture new talent and there are others
but those are the particularly relevant for this subject.
So, it's specifically in relation
to our public service remit that we decided to bid
for the 2012 Paralympic Games and we're paying for it
as with all of our content by raising revenues in the market
from commercial activities.
So, unlike the two weeks we've just had
when the Paralympics come
on I'm afraid there will be [inaudible].
And I say that because just to establish something
which is not necessarily was understood which is that we--
Channel 4 doesn't receive and never has received a penny
of direct public funding.
However while commercial we are also like the BBC a not
for profit organization, so all the revenues
that we generate get plowed back into content.
And I should stress I think
that we're not broadcasting the Paralympcs
as a money making exercise.
We are doing it to fulfill our public service remit,
both to widen the interest in Paralympic sport but also to try
and change people's attitude to disability.
As far as our coverage is concerned there are three parts
to it.
Firstly there is the amount to it we're broadcasting
about a 150 hours of live coverage and about 400 hours
of coverage in total including all the highlights and this is
about four times as much as has ever been done in the UK
and we are very proud of that.
Secondly, our presenters, half of our 16 presenters
as David was saying and reporters will be people
with some form of impairment such as Ade Adepitan,
a former wheelchair basketball Paralympian and others
such as Arthur Williams a former Royal Marine
and Martin Duggan a carpenter from Glasgow.
The other half are all experienced sports broadcast
such as Clare Balding and Jonathan Edwards.
Each part of the day will be anchored
by at least two presenters, one of whom will have an impairment.
Most of the presenters and reporters
with impairments have a come by a national talent search
that we held last year and we spent
about half a million pounds training them
to be live sport broadcasters.
And I think the biggest legacy for us would be if one or more
of this presenters with an impairment can develop,
have an ongoing career as a broadcaster within sport
or I think even better within the wider world of television
and we're also developing what I think is a much needed graphic
systems to go on screen
which will explain the classification system,
called Lexi which we never had before.
And the third is our marketing
and promotion of the Paralympics.
We're launching it with the biggest marketing campaign
in Channel 4's history and many of you may have seen
that the TV advert which started before the Olympics,
the response from the viewing public to that advert has been,
"I've never seen anything like it."
It has generated huge interest in the event
and it is also local tele had a significant impact
on ticket sales.
Our research suggested it's also significantly reframed
for people who have seen it what the Paralympics are
which is elite sport that is more
than the equal of the Olympics.
As well as starting to impact how people view people
with an impairment generally.
And we've also just recently,
last week started the [inaudible] burst of advertising
on posters and it's just about to start from television
around the theme of thanks for the warm up, which I'm glad
to say people so far have seemed to have liked.
How it will always do-- what will it achieve?
Well that's-- that simply lies ahead of us by a true sense
that the Paralympics is entering a new chapter in its story
and not because of our efforts but because of the quality
of the sport and the elite athletes
that are taking part in it.
This time brings me to the question
of today's event while we hold separate Paralympic
and Olympic events and to-- answer that--
to honor that question directly I mean I think the it's official
answer is that-- its 'cause of history it's the way
that it's developed but on the depending this it's obviously
the question of whether in the future the events either should
or indeed could be combined.
Now based on the-- based on the principle
of equality it does seem right for competitors
with in impairments to compete at the same overall sports event
with athletes without impairments.
However, there are a number of issues many
of which have already been highlighted
that would flow from such a decision.
I mean I-- a big question is what the combined event might
look like, look like?
And I'm afraid I'm not simply not experts enough
to determine whether all
of the individuals sports events could be combined but I can see
that that would be very complex
and if you couldn't combine them all then obviously there is a--
some form of on inequality there.
It could certainly I think be viable in theory
to have individual sports events side by side
but that means increasing as has been said
by at least two thirds the size of the athlete's village
and the logistics of moving all the athletes around the venues
and that obviously is an incredibly complicated tasks.
I mean I supposed just thinking about human's ability
to overcome logistics, one it seems that that could be done
but it would almost certainly reduce, I suspect the number
of countries that-- attend the first event
on which produces a separate type of inequality again.
You could've caused far back the number of sports or the number
of competitions within each sport
but that I would argue would have the same effect.
It may also mean that the scheduling of TV coverage
of different events may produce--
reduce levels of audience
for the less popular sports though I should say
as the broadcasting expert that the logistical issues
for broadcasting if having some form
of combined event I don't think those would be insurmountable.
But I think what the biggest thing to-- combining would do--
would mean that the unique identity
of the Paralympics would be impacted
and at the moment my sense is
that that distinct identity is one
of the Paralympic's great strengths.
In the round though I think that if the events could be combined
without disadvantaging some nation,
without disadvantaging some sports
or some athletes then it's a principle
that should be aspired to.
However, I suspect that this is not going to happen anytime soon
because as the president of the IPC has said the Paralympics
and Olympics operate on a nine year lead time and IOC
and the IPC are committed until after 2020
to operate them as parallel events.
But my sense is that this is the combining is the direction
of travel because I can see that that is happening
with in some individual sports whether at the training
and funding level as I believe is the case with GB Cycling
or the competitive event level as has happened
with the Commonwealth Games.
And for us these seem to be very positive developments
and it will be encouraging to see that approach taken
across a wider and wider range of sports.
Thank you.
[ Applause ]
>> Thank you very much Dan.
I think before we open, open up to the--
are there any comments that any
of the panel wish to ask each other.
To see if it can clarify the issues or any
of that panels wish to ask each other to see
and clarify the issues.
Anybody just--
>> I'm very interested in the logistical issues because they--
also are significant and I'll I like INC you will long live.
Do you think those could be solved.
With money and engineering see you we're long list.
Do you think, do you think this could be solved
with money and ingenuity?
>> I believe they can be.
I think with certainly a 9-year lead time that's being set
up [inaudible] might give me that a lot of doing.
We are not going to turn that kind of [inaudible] ground
in a 5-year infrastructure program in a city
with as much opportunity you've got here.
I think the biggest issue you've got is how many countries
around the world could genuinely compete for that.
And we already have, we [inaudible] the mix
of the [inaudible] ends will be different
to what we're seeing here in London.
There isn't that same infrastructure in place.
There will be a good legacy of [inaudible] go in but to do
on that kind of scale would be very difficult
and I fear you would find a lot of countries wouldn't be able
to [inaudible] on that kind of event
where it's offered together as one.
I think the only thing we need to remember is
that there is a hugely positive commitment to Paralympics
in this country and we see that because we have volunteers
that are coming forward [inaudible]
and not just the Olympic Games.
I think we have a way to go before you find that kind
of commitment in other countries.
I might be wrong, but I think that will be the concern
if you can bind it together as one [inaudible]
in time is the rest of the world up there with [inaudible]
of the commitment and yes we need to try
to [inaudible] forward but I think there's a period
of time it will take to do that.
>> Maybe to follow up on what you just said.
But let me ask the-- because it's written a book on,
specifically, on the history of the Paralympics--
>> Culture, rather than history
>> Culture and history.
To me-- the development
of the Paralympics is certainly a process.
Do you see it as, how do you see it over time,
are we moving towards that inevitably anyhow this kind
of are we having really a debate or we're just kind of somewhere
in the middle of a historical trend or do you see this
as something that is not inevitably moving
to a continually higher plane.
>> Well, I think the-- it's an interesting question
and I think one of the things that you see in the development
of the Paralympic games is that the scope from the early 80's,
the scope for more,
a more diverse impaired population being engaged
in a wider variety of sports was far greater than it is today.
And I think the push to commercialize the games
and follow in the footsteps
of the Olympic movement is having a detrimental effect
on people with impairments.
And I don't know whether that's something that is going
to continue or not but the, you know, the poster boy
of the Paralympic games is a figure
if not Oscar Pistorius is somebody very similar to him
that the general public can relate to
and they can perceive the ability
in what Oscar has achieved.
In much the same way they can perceive the ability of somebody
like Tanni Grey-Thompson who can push or could push a wheel chair
around the track as fast as a woman could run.
But those people with impairments that don't fit
into that, they can achieve the same standard as individuals
with an able body become marginalized as a result
of this people being seen as Paralympic role models.
And I think that if we get rid of this commercial market place
and go back to the days when it was amateur and so on.
The educational message is lost but the opportunity
to participate is gained.
So it's a double edge sword,
I don't really know what the answer and only time will tell.
>> You mentioned when we were talking earlier
that the difference between this sort of the pyramid
that you have with Olympic sports where you have a pyramid
with a wide base of people from whom [inaudible] move
to the very top of the pyramid emerges.
But in the case of Paralympic sports,
it's more like an obelisk with a much,
much narrower base to choose from.
And I'm wondering whether
until there is a number issue [inaudible]
that I hope this number issue.
But I wonder how much participation
in sport amongst disabled children is in comparison
with non disabled children and whether, whether it's
that engagement in sport during the early years,
during the school education and so on.
But actually engenders both what we
at the top end would call Olympic component
when actually much more of this is going in the schools,
in the amateur clubs and so on.
Is that where we should-- would be paying our attention.
>> Well, I think there--
I mean the development programs are out there.
The international sports organizations
that run disability-specific sports,
the International Test Federation Chap is here today.
And they run side by side.
They run their organization and so on.
In my research, the problem
that I see is there's a huge difference between individuals
who are congenitally impaired, impaired from birth and those
with acquired impairments.
And the socialization that goes on with a lot
of congenitally impaired individuals is parents wrap them
in cotton wool and don't want them necessarily to get involved
in things that are going to end up with some scraped knees,
broken legs and so on.
And their existence might be different
to an able-bodied child for lack of a better word.
And I think the development programs that are--
exist for people who acquire impairments have
increased tremendously.
The comedian Jimmy Carr, the British comedian Jimmy Carr got
into trouble a couple of years ago.
I thought it was wonderfully hilarious.
He talked about the fact the war in Afghanistan
or whichever war it was is going
to produce the best Paralympic team possible
because we're getting all these disabled soldiers.
The irony is the rigors of being a soldier are not--
it's not as rigorous an activity
as being a high-performance Paralympic athlete
in many cases.
So, you've got a program in the UK called Battle Back.
In Canada, they have a similar hockey program called
Soldier On.
The-- it's about getting ex-service people
into sporting opportunities.
But the number of ex-service men and women will actually be
on the British team in a couple of weeks' time is very,
very minimal because it's getting harder and harder
to reach the standard
of Paralympic athlete which is wonderful.
But again, the development programs
at grassroots levels used for trust
and all these different organizations have things
for getting young people into disability sports,
Paralympic days and so on
but I don't know what the uptake on those things is.
>> I just have to find a person [inaudible]
because I became paralyzed when I was 20
and actually it was incredibly too difficult
to find a sport to get involved with.
There were limited opportunities and [inaudible] that was
down to the fact that even if you found somewhere to go
such as an archery club,
they didn't have an accessible toilet,
they didn't have opportunities [inaudible] clubhouse.
You see we're marginalized on that [inaudible].
But because of this elite mentality, actually to go along
with it just for fun and it's very difficult to get the time
and the space to that.
And I think that's a real challenge out there thatI want
to do [inaudible] good a standard
as possible while I'm doing archery.
Having said that, there is not the time or opportunity
because the programs are put there in place
to make you strive to want to be a Paralympian for want
of a better word or to be the best you can be.
And that's where the funding seems to be going
in that elite program.
>> And let me just maybe followup.
There are some-- much of my work is in the developing world
and I know there are some very good programs out there
to get disabled children, disabled adults into sports.
But they are few and far between given the fact
that we're really talking about 50--
according to World Health Organization,
15 percent of the world's population are
with a disability.
That's over a billion people.
And for many-- most disabled children except
for those fortunate few who were able to get
into some specialized program, the issue is
that either they're included as part of this, you know,
the neighborhood programs or the local soccer club
or they're allowed to practice sport or they're not.
So, there are already many, many millions of children and adults
who don't have that access.
And again, I think that it's really a feeder system.
So, it's not just the elite athlete but the whole system
that we have to think about.
Yeah. My understanding is in the UK, 18 percent of all adults
with disability do some sports not necessarily elite sports.
They may just get out with their local club or they take a run
around the block or something that's compared
to 18 percent compared to I think 33 percent
or so 34 percent of non-disabled adults.
So that's already how people
with disabilities are only having access to sport
and exercise at half the rate of non-disabled people.
That has more to do I think
with as you said the local sports club.
Leonard Cheshire for example is just finishing up a survey
on something called, exercise your rights
where they're looking-- I think they're trying
to get a thousand people with disabilities to respond to go
and look at the local sports club
and juts see what's accessible, what's not,
because if that's not accessible, then the, you know,
that 12 year old kid who's interested in learning
to swim better may not get to that point where they can get
into a club and start developing their talents.
So, to me the issue is not just the elite sports
but the whole system and to understand it also
in the greater context
of a global disability rights movement that has been ongoing
for the last 40 years and the convention, a UN Convention
on the rights of persons with disabilities that was--
came into force in 2008 which essentially guarantees equality
as a rights issue and one of the rights.
And, it's clearly labeled
in the UN Convention itself is the right to play
and the right-- to access to sports.
And that convention has now been ratified
by a 114 countries around the world.
So, the fact that, you know, maybe we should also be talking
about the Olympic Movement
within the context of the convention.
>> And, this is interesting because it-- I think this--
the discussion is starting to say, it's actually
about the everyday sport if we can call it that, not just one
that happens every four years.
And I'm wondering, Dan, I mean, would Channel 4,
do you think be interested in weekly sport programs
of the sort [inaudible] eventually in the Paralympics
in the way that have sports
in a regular weekly sports programs now?
>> Yeah, I mean, I think if there is, you know,
if it can be shown that there is an audience for it.
I mean, we've doing-- I'm sure some
of you may have seen a program called
That Paralympic Show it occurs about half
of the year since we won the bid.
And, which you know, I would say has been quite popular.
I would say it's not being a sell out.
I think, I mean, I think my-- I think, let's see what happens
with the Paralympics because I think my sense is there is--
there is a surge and there's going to be a real change
in people's interest in disability sport both
in watching it and you know, I would hope
in participating as well.
>> Okay. Would anybody from the audience like to ask any
of the panelists something?
Do we have-- we have one at the back.
>> Yeah, following on from [inaudible] comments
about the broader base.
I think that that's-- there's possibly a lesser
but still a major problem with everybody in this country
of very large numbers of people who have very little
if any exercise, physical activity and not just sports.
And then, I think that sports England that's are only
interested in sports-- that does seems to be this focus
on elite sports and the only reason
for encouraging more people to take up sports is
so that we get more gold medals rather
than actually getting obesity down
and getting everybody active whether they're disables or not.
Likewise, we've watched Channel 4 and other media show.
Would you actually believe that about 50 percent
of the population are female and take part in sports apart
from athletics, it's very,
very rare to see women athletes on television.
So there are many groups that's are disadvantaged in that sense
and that don't get the coverage that actually they should get
because for example with football, I have no interest
in it but I believe they're just as good but without the egos.
[ Laughter ]
>> Any comments on that?
>> Well, I mean, I hear what you're saying.
I mean, I know that none of your position has come
out in the weekend saying that they believe
that there should be a much more significant funding emphasis
on female sport which I think is--
I think that is very welcome.
>> Thanks.
I think I probably connect to that as well.
We've seen such a surge and interest in children who want
to play sport, Olympic sports as opposed to just football
which tends to be the thing everyone wants to do is
to kick an ass, and if you're a boy anyway.
What worries me is that we will get that surge of interest
on the coverage on Channel 4 and there are worthy opportunities
out there, the disabled children either inconsequential groups
or separately to go out and do
that because our mechanism is in place.
If you don't catch people in those two, or three,
or four weeks afterwards,
the rest of the school holiday's type scenario, then,
there is a [inaudible] you are losing forever
and I think that's the danger of hosting system breaks
down across which you never get the switch back into it again.
>> I think that's one of the--
now I mentioned the UN convention
and I was strongly opposed to both the UK and Canada
where I'm originally from signing that agreement
because parts and parcel of the problem that exist
for impaired individuals.
We live in a culture of checking boxes.
Okay we signed that agreement.
As soon as that agreement signed there is a [inaudible] is placed
again on the individual to contest what the agreement says
and you haven't lived up to your end of the bargain and so on.
So it really becomes so if you are and the elephant
in the corner here is class I think.
If you're well informed, if you're well read you can go
and you can lawyer up and you can say, "Yes I deserve access
because the legislation says that.
But we know into the developing world that where, you know,
it's the under class where the greatest number
of impaired individuals exist.
And so it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy into signing
up to large scale agreements like this while
in principle maybe a good idea.
If you look at article 30 which is about sport
and leisure there are always ghetto to jail free clauses
that exist there wherever possible,
where appropriate et cetera, et cetera.
And it becomes hugely problematic.
And so the middle class impaired might be able knocking on doors
and saying, "Hey I've got a right because the UK signed
up to the convention" but others may not have the skills
and ability to engage in that sort of discourse.
>> And there is the--
the possibility that that it becomes next.
I remember a few years ago I was asked to give some advice
in Brazil on making public transport more accessible.
And it was very clear that in Brazilian legislation all laws
were there.
And the reason that all the laws to do this were there was
because every time they went to the organization
like the World Bank and to ask you for money.
There was a condition in those that you must have legislation
that says your public transport will be accessible
so they write the legislation.
And [laughter] the relationship-- yes, yes?
>> But the problem is they have no mechanism.
A mechanism in the sense of the education training as well
as the physical mechanisms.
>> To implement any of that legislation so they just sort
of tick the box but they have [inaudible] capability
at that time they didn't have the capability to be able
to put taking box into a form of action.
We see the same sort of thing happening
in other areas responses to climate change be a good examp--
good contemporary example.
And I wonder whether in a way the sort
of grandiose conventions that the UN conventions,
European agreements and sort
of thing actually are counter productive
because they diverse attention from the doing
of making sports accessible rather
than simply taking the box
to say well we we've got the right words in place.
>> If I would-- I know we want to hear
from the audience, right?
If there is some country to country and some countries
in both the developing word or do better
than other countries band book to develop in world
than do better than other countries so there is--
it's you don't want to just blanketly say the developing
world isn't doing some countries are doing pretty good job
where we say have a good legislation on the book you kind
of for example some of the best legislation were out.
The issue is it doesn't have to be either or, you know,
I would argue that you do need some sort
of international conventions so for, but that doesn't mean
that it's just, you know, that doesn't let you--
let you off the hook at your local community sports center.
And we don't ask, we don't say
to other groups you can choose one or the other.
We don't say to women you don't need laws we'll just include you
and I think that it's both disability should be the
same thing.
>> More from the floor.
[Inaudible] there is a young lady in the front
of the yellow [inaudible].
>> Thank you [inaudible] for Leoanard Cheshire.
I don't under estimate at all the logistics problems
but I do think we have a great example
in the Commonwealth Games
about how you can make a good start there.
And I don't apologize to saying
that I think the Paralympics is going
to be inspirational I really do think this is going
to be a moment and we're going to feel, a real surge
and of support around the Paralympics.
But I did want to pick up the question
that the panel raised earlier
about whether we couldn't have a bit of a leadership role here,
not next week, around here not next week, not next month
but over the next 9-year planning horizon in the same way
that we have done in London
and perhaps this is a bit of intangible points.
It's like in opposition to the bitter realities of logistics.
But, you know, for those of us who sat on their sofas
and did feel inspired by the Olympics and we did put hundreds
and hundreds of attempts to get tickets in the ballot.
Maybe there's something around what we felt as Londoners
when we saw ourselves reflected
in the Olympics it ourselves reflected in the Olympics
because I felt so proud of the way
that we cheered people whatever gender they were,
whatever clothes they wear, whatever country they came from.
And for me there were just a big empty piece
in that jigsaw 'cause I just didn't see disabled people
who live in London reflected in what I was seeing on television.
And I just think and I'd be interested
in the panel's views on this.
Whether there's not an opportunity for us
to show some leadership [inaudible].
>> Shall I [inaudible].
I completely agree in sense that we will see some of this
and we're hoping [inaudible] well off that we--
and great sense of pride to it all of us being involved in,
you know, we're going to that side.
It just takes a leadership vote.
We very much do that in terms of a hand over to [inaudible].
And I think that, you know, mix form as well in times
that [inaudible] system they may have a legislative prices
but they don't [inaudible] and say have to implement
in that part of that really showing the skills
and [inaudible] we've got over here and all that one
of the practical level in that side of things.
The way that we'll go forward is as a games,
we will [inaudible] the games.
Everything we do is combined
and looks certain inclusive approach from that side of it.
Or we have this relative [inaudible] two separate events
are there.
The change we're going to the one event and
or some greater level of integration.
I'm not sure who the people are to take
that forward and make that happen.
The [inaudible] an IPC always have been going
to receive [inaudible] structures and to go
and set this with the right people and this organizations
without openings to make that happen to accept it.
Well I think it will be key
that will stop [inaudible] along the night,
things will be so down.
You don't have 60, 70,000 people standing in the stadium,
everything comes out your wing now
to have you increase his thoughts.
It's not like that on your 3,000 people are going to show
up tonight They won a sports that the people won't see.
Let's have a-- so that's to open
up that window opportunity whether it's , you know,
program of 19 years to say, "Okay there is still a value.
People will still try to insist we can sit
up on that side of things.
We can put logistics in place.
We can't bribe the leadership or with those parties together.
>> I'm interested in the "feel good" factor and, you know,
everyone is inspiring the next generation and to me--
to my mind, you know, I'm physically active, I love sport.
I'm no longer a sportsman
but to me my daily constitutional jog is what I do
and part of who I am.
But for the majority of people
who were sitting there watching the Olympics inspiring the next
generation, you know, when a young kid goes
down to the Athletic Club and, you know, 16, 17 years old
and wants to be the next Mo Farah okay?
And then realizes he has to run in the morning
and then come home from, school and run in the evening
and then run the next morning and, you know, it gets cold
and wet and damp in the winter and it's dark when you run
in the morning and it's dark when you run in the evening.
It's sort of reminiscent of New Year's resolutions and people
who sign up to the gym or mass and say, "Hey,
I'm going to get fit this year," the reality of, you know,
being an Olympic sports person
or a Paralympic sport person is it's really hard graph
and I don't know the physical activity message.
I don't think it really got through.
The BBC had it's business where if you're interested in kayaking
or canoeing, click on the pick strip and fill
in your details and so on.
But I don't know I didn't do
that so I don't know what the link was
and whether there is its engagement
with physical activity which I think is the much more
important message.
Not everyone who takes up running is going to be Mo Farah.
>> Can I just have one sec in terms
of we've done some amazing [inaudible] and the take
up of sports and kids being committed for a period 2,
3 years is huge compared to the level of [inaudible] before.
Now there's a-- the problem there is,
you sent me incredible massive results, incredible amounts
of money to do that in all kinds of levels.
If you try to roll that program out across the rest of UK,
[inaudible] and can you retain that by means of.
Now the games will have gone as of end of September.
So I think that is a real challenge it is tough to go
and we will still see this that's [inaudible] is going
through I think-- you will decide that.
>> Maybe I should follow--
the remarks are I think was a little different.
I think it was a very important point that if London as a city
as a community has gotten tremendous amount of pride
about how this extraordinary games have been carried out.
Can we do the same thing--
can essentially that was be continued over and can
that be a focus that we can push?
The political leadership is out there,
the media becomes very involved, people become
on a day to day basis.
You know, if you're chatting with someone and not
that you chat with someone on the tube
but it does happen from time to time.
That's sort of [inaudible] and, you know,
and I think defining London as a city and as a community,
I think the Olympics has done a great deal to help people
and conceptualize what they are
and how they are citizens of major city.
And the question was, can the Paralympic essentially be part
of that?
Can you combine it?
And I think that yes we can.
And I think it's well handled and well directed.
We'll be missing a trick not to do it 'cause this is one
of the things that makes London a unique city.
And it is something that could be indeed it's a very important
legacy from the Paralympics is essentially
to take the goodwill that's already been engendered
by the Olympics and try to extend it.
And I think the part of it was, it was the media,
it was the volunteers, it was the-- from top to bottom,
the community coming together around a sporting event.
And can we-- and this is where, if we think of the Paralympics
as an extension of the Olympics since it's the same sport,
you know, the same group
of people working together in the same venues.
I think that if we could do that, link the two more firmly
at this point, I think that it be very good for London.
I think it would be a very important legacy.
>> London for example whether--
it's very interesting watching the closing ceremony yesterday.
That this was very much--
and this is very much in the tradition of these events
as they hand over to the next place.
But it did start here,
that actually the next Olympic event actually is
in two weeks time.
And maybe what we should be doing,
for that event should have been doing is handing
over to the Paralympics.
And it isn't the end of the Paralymics that you look forward
to the two sets of games
in the following whenever it's four years time.
And it did strike me that, you know,
the integration doesn't necessarily mean doing things
at the same time.
It's somehow seemed the two as together maybe.
One does thing separately and differently
but actually it is the same event separated by two weeks
of logistical adjustments separated by people beginning
to [inaudible] again the [inaudible].
But so maybe the question right now, it might be too hard to do
for the social reasons we've been hearing about,
but maybe there are always integration you can take
at a higher level that could work.
Is that--
>> We've been-- move the closing ceremonies
to the end of the Paralympics.
>> Well, I think you would hand over idea, the hand over as much
as the Paralympics is the next Olympic city, is a terrific one.
And I think-- I also think if there's a way
of reducing the hand over period I think that would be good.
I mean I understand why it is the length it is at the moment
but that is just down to logistics.
I mean I think there is another question I raised it
because I don't, I don't have fix point of view about it
but some people say, or should the--
would the Paralympics perhaps be running before the Olympics,
is that something that could happen?
I mean I-- the thing which I'm really encouraged about is
on the basis that you know you have to start somewhere.
I do think that the integration that's happening
within individual sports is really interesting.
And I think if that can be develop then
that could teach a lot for, you know, for the events
that are even bigger ultimately the Olympics
and the Paralympics.
And that the way that--
as I understand it the way that's GB cycling do it.
This guy is extraordinary man, Dave [inaudible] he's in charge
of an overall pot of money for Olympians and Paralympians
and they all train together and they all use the same facilities
and I think that that's, I think that's terrific.
And I think if we could see that develop with other sports
that would be a very, very good development.
>> More from the floor.
>> I see there is one in the front.
[ Pause ]
>> My name is Joseph and I'll give you a little bit
of background information about my self.
I'm involved with sports.
In one area I'm an adviser
to all sports organizations throughout London in order
to make their sports more inclusive and accessible.
I'm also involved in [inaudible] and the ODA as well.
And I'm also very involved in the deaf Olympic Games
and I see sports at many different levels.
Different levels
of accessibility for disabled people.
The UK is one of the most advance nations
in terms of equality.
But I feel that we haven't really made that much progress
as a country during the work that we've done
on the Olympic and Paralympic games.
One of the questions I've been asking is,
how many disabled people actually are working
in [inaudible] and ODA?
If the current games is about working on both the Olympic
and Paralympics games with the same staff carrying
out the same tasks on both events in parallel.
If we had say 50 percent disabled people
and 50 percent non disabled people working on these events,
would that mean that the Olympics
and Paralympics could advance much more quickly
and rapidly into the future?
The last point I'd like to make is that we see things
from an external perspective nor really
from an internal perspective.
And what I mean by that is
that with a few disabled people working
within [inaudible] we haven't really been able
to take the lead in ensuring that both sets
of games are accessible.
We're allowing external factors to influence us rather
than leading from within.
The big question I have is, the Paralympics are there--
[ Pause ]
-- when people-- they sort of remind us
that when we were watching the Olympic games, those people
who we're seeing are living up to this kind of perfect ideal
that we might have but the Paralympics are there
to remind us that not everybody is the same.
And what we're trying to do is get people
to accept the reality that's out there.
I apologize but I've made a lot of points
and maybe asked too many questions.
[ Applause ]
Thank you
>> I suspect that one is coming my way.
In terms of staff first of all,
I mean Josie we've met before [inaudible] things [inaudible].
I'm not sure the exact numbers
of disabled people we have working across.
Certainly from the ODA perspective there is a huge
drive across our recruitment process
when building a site we're getting people involved
with [inaudible] tracing that disability
but unless [inaudible] the side of things.
So you know [inaudible]
that I just putting the shelf on the table.
There is a huge piece that went down there.
What I will tell you is to recruit disabled people
into our, a work trade work force is the hardest thing we
have to do.
I recruited [inaudible] women
who are [inaudible] other minority groups in that
but disabled people is very difficult.
And as a battle that we face
in this country is how do we get people into that process.
So aside of the event element of it
that was a real challenge we face and I think we look at that
and say those numbers haven't worked from what we know.
Although we also have to accept the fact
that not everyone [inaudible] disability
and we've been encouraging ideas
so we can support them as much as possible.
I think just to [inaudible] in terms of--
if we get off on this Paralympic event if we're going to put
on an Olympic event have we got enough people
in there pushing all the different issues on the table
around all types of inclusion.
And certainly there are--
and I suspect you know some of them have made
in local there are key individuals that do that role
in very senior positions with different disabilities.
I suspect you would also [inaudible] agree
that that's [inaudible] every single [inaudible]
of the business.
And we did see where we had [inaudible] groups
that we got some people coming with disabilities
where they took on some more formalized roles as [inaudible]
than that but there wasn't that longevity too and I would accept
that something that I would personally
like to see more of going forward.
>> I think that there is also a problem,
not just within the running of the games,
but also within the broader field
of adaptive physical activity which is very big
in North America and parts of Europe, it's not so influential
in the UK because the practice is--
World Meeting in this country but the international federation
of adopted physical activity, the number of scholars you see
that are actually working in this environment
with impairments is very, very small and it's a huge problem.
There are increasing numbers of scholars
within disability studies,
they're more politically active inside of things
but within adoptive physical activity,
it is seen as a very maternal type organization,
and so when we're talking about developing opportunities
for people with a variety of different impairments,
if they're not people actively engaged in academic discourses
around these issues that have impairments,
that have personal experiences where again,
it's not just a board rooms that are with a problem,
it's academic fields and other environments as well.
>> I will get along with that, I might--
my day job is I run the Civil Engineering department at UCL
and Civil Engineering is actually a large part
of what actually put the Olympic Games together and physically
in terms of the venues and the infrastructure and so on,
and it is very difficult for us and we tried very hard to--
but obviously not hard enough to attract people
into Civil Engineering at-- to learn to be a Civil Engineer.
You have different sorts of events and I think
if we could only do that, that would actually help a lot
of that construction and design process
that would actually make infrastructure
and venues much better.
The difficulty is that I think the perception of an industry
about Civil Engineering is one of mostly and forgive me
to say this but mostly men in Wellington boots
out on some muddy building site in the pouring rain
and that isn't particularly attractive to a lot
of people including women and some men, and we are changing
that image because it's wrong, but it's taking a long time
to get that through the process
and disabled people are people we would really welcome inside
the profession because it lends that additional perspective
that is so desperately needed.
So I hink it's a tough task because that will start
with what they were doing at school
and what young people perceptions
of a particular industry might be.
I'm very conscious of the time, do we have one last question?
Let's have at the back row for [inaudible].
[ Pause ]
Thank you
>> Were you pointing at me or--
>> You're perfect.
>> [Laughter] on this note, and I wanted to talk
about technology and I'd like to say first that as an engineer,
I do agree with your comments on the lack
of female representing role models and disabled people
in engineering, and I work, I engineer enabling technologies
and I have haven't worked with a single disabled person
who benefits from the technologies I work on,
and I'm not talking here about things like the round wheels
of the team GB Cyclists,
I talk about really truly enabling technology.
I'd like to see if you thing we'll see a similar level
of attention to this technology that enable disabled people
to really compete at their highest--
at their best level or if that would be victimizing
in a way taking the attention away from the person,
the athlete and focusing it too much on the technology,
is technology enabling or is it victimizing
for lack of a better word.
>> Thank you very much.
David if you want to.
>> Well, I think one of the interesting things
about the technology that Oscar Pistorius has used is the racing
wheelchairs, the tennis wheelchairs,
wheelchair rugby chairs, and so on,
are visible signs of technology.
But as you all know, the technology that exists
in the Olympics far supersedes the technology
that existed 20 years ago, whether it be the bikes
that they're using even down to the footwear that's being used
and the surface of the track.
So, I don't know exactly what you're getting at.
But the one thing that has to be said is that the technology
that Oscar uses for example,
if he were 20 years older he would not be competing
as an ambulant runner, most likely he would be competing
as a wheelchair athlete.
And so that changes the nature of what he does
because the technology wasn't good enough to do the sort
of strenuous training and so on from a standing position
if he were say my age.
So, I think the technology is changing the phase
of the Paralympic Games but it's also changing the face
of the Olympic Games and all other sporting endeavors
as well it's just a little bit more obvious in the Paralympics
because of the necessity of movement
that requires technology which may not be so obvious
in the Olympic context.
>> I think that's an excellent point and the issue
to my mind is why isn't that part of, you know,
of very public discourse.
So, it's been the emphasis has been on, you know,
the unfair advantage or the, you know, the technology
for folks with disabilities.
But in fact all technology
around sports has made a significant progress
over the past several decades.
And so the issue is really to reframe some of these questions
and take it away from the disability, not disability
and put it in a wider context.
That's I think what you're response.
And then excellent example is that I haven't though of that,
you know, 'till you mentioned it.
And I hope now that you've brought it
up that channel 4 will of course bring this up [laughs].
Ans as a matter of fact it might be, you know,
like that 15 minutes that maybe you can interview him [laughs].
But I think that that's the issue is to have a discussion
where you reframe the question.
>> And I think [inaudible] something
where it gets really fascinating is when you get situation
of Oscar who can ran faster than [inaudible] 100 meters
and that's kind of where we get to the point
where people say how long this technology gone too far.
And that signs to get the coordinates as on the other way
to like really quite adjust the situation.
Technology can be positive in so many ways in terms
of being assisted towards disabled people and it's, again,
20 years ago don't have opportunities that you have
out there now and that's kind of stuff.
I thought in reality the technology should stay with side
within a field of [inaudible] mixing those technologies
together in the sports element.
I personally feel more comfortable [inaudible]
at the moment I think.
>> The-- I still about the Formula 1 the way
that the technology that's used
in Formula 1 eventually appears in domestic car.
And, sometimes we actually have to push the technology
to the end to find out what actually can be useful
for everybody.
And in a sense I look at the sporting wheelchair designs,
we gone a huge distance in designing wheelchairs
to do fantastic things, to go incredibly fast to corner.
But I don't see the day to day going to the supermarket sort
of wheel chair for example,
actually taking the same stretch forward.
The person, the 85 year old person who has
to push an 84 year old person in their wheelchair to go
and buy new daily milk is still as tough and difficult to do
as it was 20 years ago.
And I think we haven't really made that translation as well
as we are today, about to the whole different debate [laughs].
Okay, I think what we should do is draw the evening [inaudible].
We should draw the evening [inaudible].
I like to thank all our panelists
for their insightful remarks and responses to questions.
So we like to give them a good round of applause.
[ Applause ]