In six short years, the eyes of the world will fall on Canada’s west coast when the Olympic Games roll into Vancouver. In last week’s special panel discussion entitled “Vancouver 2010: What Does this Mean for Canada and our Athletes?,” a part of the U of T President’s Circle lecture series, many important questions were raised on the merits and the drawbacks of hosting the largest global sporting event.
The discussion featured three panelists, each bringing a different viewpoint to the table, and was moderated by Bruce Kidd, dean of the Faculty of Physical Education and Health.
Representing the athlete’s perspective was Veronica Brenner, a U of T economics student and 2002 Olympic silver medallist in aerial freestyle skiing. Weighing in for the media was Nancy Lee, executive director of CBC sports television and recently appointed Chef de Mission for the 2004 Summer Games in Athens. Rounding out the panel was Helen Jefferson Lenskyj, a sociology and equity studies professor at OISE and an outspoken critic of the Olympic Games.
The Olympic Games reach a global audience in the billions, Kidd pointed out in his introduction to kick off the evening. And consequently, the Olympics have become more than just a sporting event-they impact broadly on the host country’s economic development, sport and recreational development, and cultural development.
Lee was the first to touch on the potential benefits of hosting the 2010 games. As overseer of the CBC, which will air the games, Lee made it clear that Vancouver will help the Canadian public focus their attention on the Canadian athlete. Unlike other developed nations, Canada’s budget does not normally include subsidies to accommodate the so-called elite athlete. According to Lee, Vancouver’s successful bid will enable all levels of government and large corporate sponsors to get on board and fund state of the art facilities, top-level coaching, and sufficient financial support for the athletes themselves.
Lee says that breweries, banks, telecommunications, and automotive companies have already been knocking on Vancouver’s door, hoping to take part in supporting the games and athletes. That kind of important financial commitment to sport in this country would not be forthcoming if the Olympics were hosted outside of Canada.
Brenner knows firsthand the many financial obstacles the Canadian elite athlete has to overcome. Brenner agreed with Lee, saying that Vancouver will bring significant benefits to the financial needs of the athlete, something she asserts is of utmost importance for top-level competition.
What Brenner made abundantly clear, however, is that even though the games are a business, nothing compares to representing your country on the Olympic global stage. “It is important to bring a sense of pride to Canadians,” says Brenner, and hosting the Olympics will allow Canadians to rally around each other.
Although in principle she is not against financially supporting elite athletes, Professor Lenskyj argues that for the majority of the population, the cons greatly outweigh the pros in hosting an Olympic Games. Lenskyj, who has authored a book on the social and economic problems plaguing Sydney, Australia in the wake of the 2000 Olympics, believes that the vulnerable members of society suffer in a post-games setting. Lenskyj says it was no coincidence that the British Columbia provincial government cut $609 million from social assistance at the same time that $1.2 billion was injected into the Vancouver bid.
Lenskyj also challenged Brenner and Lee’s comments by saying that a country’s reputation is not based on how many gold medals it wins, or if it has an Olympic Oval in which to practice year-round. Rather, Lenskyj asserts, it should be how we accommodate those most in need.
The floor was then opened to an enthusiastic audience. Questions and comments reflected a pro-Vancouver side, but what everyone could agree on is that the IOC (International Olympic Committee), the media, and the Canadian government are all responsible for the exploitation of the elite athlete.
It was also clear that Professor Lenskyj is not alone in her criticism. From now until the opening ceremonies kick off in 2010, Vancouver will face opposition from special interest groups fighting for affordable housing, environmental concerns, and aboriginal land rights, to name only a few.
After digesting all the information from the panelists, Kidd summed it up best by saying that the Olympics are a complex project, and we’ll just leave it at that.
