i

Be lett

By MIKE GIDORA

Excuses — but no money

When will the mandarins of
Canada’s amateur sporting
community wake up to the fact that
they can no longer trundle out all of
the standard whines and com-
plaints to justify this country’s
shameful record in amateur sport?

Every time there’s a major
international sporting event, these
fellows, all nicely attired in their
Sport Canada blazers lines up at
the cocktail parties, and recite, as
if on cue, all of the regular excuses.
And every time, they are all pretty
much the same ones we heard last
time.

They start off mildly, perhaps by
complaining of the lack of training
facilities in this country. Then,
warming up to their task, they will
downplay the performances of
athletes from other countries, most
notably the socialist countries, by
trying to stick the label
‘professional’? on them. That
argument, shown time and time
again to be utterly false, goes
something to the effect that all that
the socialist athletes do is train for
their sport and aré supported by
the state for that purpose only. The
implication clearly being that the
socialist athletes are mere pawns
in the hands of the state to be used
for political purposes and, as such,

are tainted.

And, after a few more cocktails
they haul out the old standby;
there’s no way we can win because
of the partisan judges who give
higher marks to socialist athletes
from political motivation. That, of
course, is the athletic community’s
contribution to the famous
‘worldwide communist menance.’

Of the standard excuses, and.
there are many more than the.
three listed above, only the first
one, that of the lack of adequate
facilities, has any merit. The rest
are patently ridiculous for a
start, and, moreover, harmful to
the development of amateur sport
in this country.

There can be no question that
Canada is falling further and
further behind in international
sport, with thé-possible exception
of swimming, but the reasons are
not those which the~ sport
bureaucrats offer us.

If we ever hope to improve our
standing in the world of in-
ternational sport, we must take a
look at a few fundamental facts.
For one, why is that countries with
much smaller populations than
Canada, such as Cuba and the
German Democratic Republic
consistently outpoint us in in-
ternational competitions?

Secondly, why is it that, in
Canada, only sports which offer the
promise of fame and fortune in the
professional sphere seem to
flourish?

And finally, what can be done to
change these very basic realities
which our athletes face?

Unlike Cuba and the German
Democratic Republic, Canada
does not have a mass athletic
program. In Cuba, 33 per cent of
the entire population actively
participates in sports programs. In
Germany, the figure is 60 per cent.
The rate in Canada is significantly
lower, probably less than 20 per
cent, and most of those par-
ticipating are under 20 years of
age, well below the age of most
international competitors.

Narrowing down the base from

which you draw your international
competitors is bound to have a
serious effect on the quality of the
competitor selected. As it is now in
Canada, only those who can afford
to give the time necessary for
training can ever hope to reach
international calibre. That means
that only those who don’t need to

work to support themselves, or ~

those who are attending university
will be able to participate. Just as
sport in old England was reserved
for the leisure class, so is sport in
new Canada reserved for the
wealthy. The working class simply
cannot afford to participate.

Such a program of non-funding,
and adherence to Victorian con-
cepts of amateurism, is guaran-
teed to narrow your base, and
consequently weaken your
strength.

Carried to its logical conclusion,
this program means that the-
competitor himself provides his
training facilities, once again
denying the working athlete access
to the program. That basically is
our approach to sport in this
country, and we can expect nothing
more in terms of success than what
we have today.

Our lack of success in the 1976
Winter Olympics is a case in point.
To reach a level of competence to
compete in those games costs a lot
of money. For example, a figure
skater will spend upwards of 30
hours a week on the ice, under the
direction of a professional coach.
Ice time is very expensive, the
professional has to be paid,
equipment, costumes and skates
all add up over time, leaving the
athlete with an enormous bill to be
paid, and that in turn eliminates a
large portion of the population
which must be much more con-
cerned with paying the rent, and

. simply can’t afford anything extra.

Skiing is another case. Here
equipment, lift fees and so on are
even more costly. The same with
bobsledding, tobogganing and ice
hockey.

Compounding these already
overwhelming problems is the fact
that of the money which is
provided by the government, one
half of it goes to administration
costs; to provide the Sport Canada
types with their blazers, to pay for
their cocktail parties, and to send
them around the world to major
international events. The other
half is spent to developing training
programs, paying athletes travel
costs, hiring coaches and providing

the minimum in facilities. ‘

One small item which has come
out of the Innsbruck Olympics,
shows just how far we are behind in
this country. The German luge
(toboggan) team spent $150,000

simply to design its sled, on top of -

the millions of dollars already
spent in facilities and training for
all of their athletes, whether of
international calibre or not.
Canada’s entire luge team budget
is $7000, and it is that high only
because this is an Olympic year.

Canada spent at least $100,000 on
cocktail parties and receptions to
promote Montreal as the site of the
1976 summer games.

Now that we’ve got the summer
games, we’re stuck with all three;
misplaced priorities, substandard
results, and a fiasco scheduled for
Montreal in July.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FEBRUARY 13, 1976—Page 10

wing | ‘Repeat of 1970’ cited |

in latest VGH cutbacks

Cont'd from pg. 1
Coming out of the meeting with
VGH officials, Gerow said, ‘“When
we heard Key’s announcement we
were shocked. It looks like 1970
revisited, when then health

‘minister Ralph Loffmark went

slashing at staff and making
cutbacks from one end of the
province to the other.

“At this time, we don’t know who
is culpable, VGH or the health
department. But a five per cent
overrun is negligible. What is
needed is not cutbacks but more
money to make payments.”

Gerow said the hospital should
pressure the provincial govern-
ment for more money rather than
reduce services or shut any part of
the hospital down for a period of
time... “If this goes ahead,” he
warned, ‘‘we are going to have to
consider working to rule and we
are going to do our best to inform
the public of the deterioration in
health care that occurs when a
hospital tries to meet a budget
rather than the needs of people.”’

A city doctor-who is on the staff
at Vancouver General Hospital
told the Tribune he heard the
announcement of a cutback with
“utter disbelief and amazement,
knowing the pressure on the
hospital by people wanting to get
im

He said, ‘“‘The present facilities
at VGH are now inadequate and
there are long waiting lists for
hospital beds. Doctors face ex-
treme difficulties getting hospital
beds for needy cases. To get
patients into hospital requires
desperate measures by doctors
under present circumstances
where 90 per cent of VGH beds are
utilized. Often doctors can only get
patients into hospital on an
emergency basis.

“Tf the plan to cut back on
hospital beds is gone ahead with it
will be with total disregard of the
community’s needs and would
represent a completely bankrupt
position,’’ he said.

The proposed cutback plan is
arousing wide: concern among
leading people in the medical
profession as well as the public.
Last Friday J. V. Christensen,
chairman of the board of B.C.
Medical Centre, called on the
provincial health department to
give cost-cutting a lower priority.
“The main point is to improve
health care and the secondary

‘problem is ‘can we afford it?’ ” He

warned that “‘if we take the wrong
turn, we could pay for it for many
years.” He was apparently ex-
pressing concern of many medical
men and women, that medicine is a
changing field with changing

Vancouver General Hospital .. .

For the Socreds, the same priorities — and cutbacks. In 1970, Ralf
Loffmark, health minister under W. A. C. Bennett, impos
“economies” on B.C. hospitals, resulting in inferior care and st@

.s

layoffs. Above, picketers protesting the cutback policy outside M

Royal Columbian Hospital in New Westminster.

procedures and techniques and
cutbacks make it difficult to
inaugurate new projects with the
result that hospital and medical
care falls behind.

Christensen’s concern was also
voiced this week by Dr. Nancy Sch-
wartz, assistant professor of
nutrition and dietetics at the
University of B.C. She described
the VGH cutbacks as ‘“‘very, very
unfortunate.”

The key question to be faced up
to in the present situation is: How
valuable is human life and concern
for the health of the community?
Cutbacks in hospital and medical
services to the people is one of the
most serious: issues facing the
people of B.C. for a long time.
Apparently the Socred government
has already made its decision:
cutback costs and services to make
hospital facilities self-supporting
and keep costs within budget
guidelines set down by the
government.

This is confirmed by the
statement of VGH board chairman
Gordon Gilley when he said this
week, ‘‘VGH must take the
leadership in bringing its house in
order within the guidelines of the
provincial government.”’ Although ~
Victoria has denied that any
directives have been sent to the
hospitals in B.C., it’s quite clear
from Gilley’s statement that
hospitals have already received
instructions setting out guidelines
under which they will have to

drastically cut back on hospi
and medical facilities.
In 1970, when the Socré
government’s attempts to cutba
on hospital services came und
-sharp fire, the then Liberal lead
Pat McGeer said: ‘‘When you st
cutting back the health services
province it’s a very serious ba'
ward step.’’ One does not have
wonder what stand the new P#
McGeer will take in view of
record on ICBC. “If you cal
afford a hospital bed stay at homé
will probably be his advice. ~

whose membership is direc
affected since the plan would me

lead to a serious deterioration °
hospital services. The union fi
expressed concern that there bh?
not been ‘‘a tremendous hue 2!
ery coming from all over ©
province.” The reason there has!
been is that the public are j¥
beginning to find out what
Socred government is up to in
field of health care.

The union has put forward |
sensible proposal which would
the widest support among #
sections of the community. “!!
stead of trying to make the peo?

the budget, it should be the oth
way around. There should bé
joint application from the hosp¥
and the union to the minister }
health for a proper budget.”’

a

the first to face proposed Socred cutbacks.
\

The Hospital Workers Unio!

the loss of hundreds of jobs, is a
concerned that the cutback wou!

— the patients and employees —’)