European sports co-operation

15 September 1992

Doc. 6664

1403-14/9/92-5-E

Report

on European sports co-operation

(Rapporteur: Mr MÜLLER, Germany, CDU/CSU)

Summary

The report reviews progress in European sports co-operation since the last Assembly debate in 1984.

Significant texts adopted by the Council of Europe in this period include the European Convention on Spectator Violence (1985), the European Anti-Doping Convention (1989), the European Sports Charter (1992) and the Code of Sports Ethics (also 1992).

The political changes in Central and Eastern Europe are having a negative effect on sports provision, one particular problem being restricted access to the countryside for sports and other leisure activities. The Assembly should liaise with the Committee for the Development of Sport in assisting these countries.

Despite progress in sports co-operation, major problems remain, the combating of violence and reacting against the over-commercialisation of sport. Council of Europe work should continue on the values of sport and their promotion.

I. DRAFT RECOMMENDATION

1. The Assembly last debated European sports co-operation in 1984 (see Recommendation 993 and Doc. 5270) and expressed its satisfaction with the approach of the Council of Europe on the basis of the Committee for the Development of Sport (CDDS) and the Conference of European Ministers responsible for Sport.

2. It has followed the activity of the CDDS, the Ministerial Conferences held in Dublin 1986, Reykjavik 1989 and Rhodes 1992, as well as the informal ministerial conferences held in Lisbon 1985, Strasbourg 1985, Athens 1988 and Budapest 1991.

3. Four major texts have resulted:

i. European Convention on spectator violence and misbehaviour at sports events and in particular at football matches (1985);

ii. European Anti-Doping Convention (1989);

iii. European Sports Charter (1992);

iv. Code of Sports Ethics (1992);

4. Account has been taken of the implications for sport of the political changes in Central and Eastern Europe. Action is urgently needed on the parliamentary level to assure sports provision.

5. The Assembly has also noted the European Community's position on sport as set out in the communication of the Commission of 31 July 1991 and the constitution of a European (Community) Sports Forum. It welcomes the understanding and co-operation that has been established between the Community and Council of Europe in this field.

6. Many problems however remain and amongst them:

i. sports provision in Central and Eastern Europe (and related legislation);

ii. access to the countryside for sport and other leisure activities;

iii. the classification of sites associated with sport;

iv. equal sporting chances;

v. continuing violence associated with sport;

vi. doping;

vii. money in sport.

7. The Assembly welcomes the fact that the next informal meeting of European sports ministers will tackle the question of money in sport (France 1993).

8. It calls on governments of member states that have not yet done so to ratify the conventions on violence and anti-doping referred to above.

9. It recommends that the Committee of Ministers asks governments of member states to implement as effectively as possible the new European Sports Charter and Code of Sports Ethics (agreed by the European Ministers of Sport in Rhodes 1992).

10. The Assembly further recommends that the Committee of Ministers

i. extend work on the values of sport and their promotion;

ii. continue its efforts to assist sports provision in Central and Eastern Europe (with particular attention to legislation, a field in which the Assembly might also be involved);

iii. prepare an agreement on access to the countryside for sport and other leisure activities;

iv. classify sites of significance for sport.

II. DRAFT ORDER

1. The Assembly, referring to its Recommendation ..., decides to play an active part in assisting Central and East European countries to review their sports policies and provision.

2. To this effect the Committee on Culture and Education (Sub-Committee on Youth and Sport) is asked to liaise with the Committee for the Development of Sport (CDDS) and to hold consultative meetings on sports legislation with the responsible parliamentary committees in Central and Eastern Europe.

III. EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

by Mr Müller

A. INTRODUCTION

1. Since the last general report presented to the Assembly on European sports co-operation by Mr Worrell in 1984 (see Doc. 5270 and Recommendation 993) there have been major developments in three areas: considerable progress in European co-operation including the launching of two major conventions and a new European Sports Charter, the beginnings of veritable paneuropean co-operation, and final clarification of the role of the European Community. Two Olympiads have also intervened.

2. This report aims at being factual in the first instance but also controversial. Debate on sports co-operation cannot escape the questions that all European countries are currently facing with regard to the degree of European Union implied by Maastricht and its implications for national teams whether in European or Olympic events. New and urgent questions surround sport as such. A role of the Assembly is to provoke governmental discussion in these areas.

B. THE BASIC RULES OF SPORTS CO-OPERATION

3. The primary rule is that sport is for the individual participant or athlete and for the club or federation that runs his sport. The situation can vary with the sport or national (or European) model, but the general principle is that sport is a non-governmental activity. As in the field of the media, governments (and also Brussels) should only interfere when absolutely necessary (principle of subsidiarity). The problem arises most immediately in the control of crowd violence, of advertising and of drug use (sports association or state responsibility?).

4. A second rule is that of arbitration. Fortunately the European Community has followed the Council of Europe in setting up a body (the European Community Sports Forum) in which, as in the Council of Europe's Steering Committee for the Development of Sport (CDDS), both governments and sports federations are represented. Such bodies are also able to work towards the co-ordination of legislation: in fields such as doping control it is important to apply the same rules.

5. Thirdly, and increasingly important for governmental authorities, it is necessary to insist on the sporting aspect of sport, on its ethical values, on the fact that sport is sport and that it should involve people from all sectors of society. Sport is in the first place its practice not its viewing.

6. Finally sport should not permit cheating. Penalties have to be imposed as sanctions and have to be effective. For this reason drugs are to be forbidden and also bribes. But why should this not include other financial inducements? Ideally all financial considerations should be excluded from sport. A few years ago this might have appeared heresy in Western Europe. In Central and Eastern Europe it is a new and certainly major problem. There are hopeful signs however that athletes and governments may be able to work together towards a more reasonable solution (excepting perhaps the high-tech "sports" such as Formula 1). As a result of the changes in Central and Eastern Europe it is far from being too late to defend amateur sports.

C. KEY AREAS OF PROGRESS IN EUROPEAN CO-OPERATION

7. The Council of Europe has addressed all these basic issues in the period from 1984 to the present.

8. The Committee for the Development of Sport (CDDS) has maintained its role as a European forum for concertation between governments and sports federations. Its work has provided the basis for the four fundamental international agreements reached in this period (on violence, drugs, ethics and a new sports charter); it has also held an impressive series of seminars on aspects of sports co-operation and a number of texts adopted by the Committee of Ministers in particular with regard to the extension of sport for all to disabled persons.

9. In this same period three Conferences of European Ministers responsible for Sport have been held in the framework of the European Cultural Convention (Dublin 1986, Reykjavik 1989 and Rhodes 1992) and four informal ministerial meetings (Lisbon 1985, Strasbourg 1985, Athens 1988, Budapest 1991) have taken place. Four major European agreements have resulted.

10. European Convention on spectator violence and misbehaviour at sports events and in particular at football matches 1985 (ETS 120 available separately). The need for European action in this area had already been underlined by the Assembly (Recommendation 963 adopted in January 1983; rapporteur on sport Mr Atkinson). The European Sports Ministers reacted immediately to the tragedy in the Heysel stadium on 29 May 1985; within 3 months a convention was on the table for signature; the convention entered into force on 1 November 1985 and so far 23 countries have ratified. It has subsequently been monitored by the Standing Committee. Clearly greater emphasis has to be placed on the security of sports installations in the aftermath of the Furiani disaster on 5 May 1992; national policy is involved here (decentralisation of resources) as well as the responsibilities of local clubs. The points made in the convention might well be applied on these other levels. Further lessons have no doubt been learned from the Swedish experience of hosting the European Cup this year. The convention has provided a basis however for building on such experiences. It remains a remarkable example of the potential for European co-operation through the Council of Europe when the political will exists.

11. Anti-Doping Convention 1989 (ETS 135 available separately). Assembly concern for resolute action was tenaciously maintained by Mr Lambiotte. Final agreement resulted from the establishment of co-operation with the responsible Olympic committee. The convention is the first legally binding international agreement on the subject and has been ratified so far (July 1992) by 16 countries (Slovenia was the latest signatory on 2 July 1992); it is open to non-European states.

12. European Sports Charter 1992 (adopted in Rhodes, text available separately). This is a timely and enterprising development of the "European Sport for All Charter" launched in Brussels in 1975 by the Sports Ministers and formally accepted only in the form of a resolution by the Committee of Ministers as an appendix to their Resolution (76) 41. The Assembly was itself fully committed to the earlier exercise and its same rapporteur was responsible for its earlier support given to these initiatives: see Doc. 2631 and Recommendation 588 (of 1970) on "the development of sport for all and the creation of co-ordinating structures" and Doc. 3186 and Recommendation 682 (of 1972) on "A European Sport for All Charter" (Assembly rapporteur in both cases, Mr Müller).

13. The same problems occur as in the 1970s with regard to giving the new European Sports Charter, despite its importance, any binding force. Many countries, especially in Central and Eastern Europe, would be in favour of seeking governmental recognition of the charter. Others do not want governments to interfere too heavily. The Committee of Ministers should at least invite governments to ensure the charter is implemented and ask the CDDS to monitor the results. In due course consideration can be given to the possibility of adopting the charter as an international instrument. On a lighter note, potential critics could perhaps concentrate their efforts on attempting a better definition of sport than that contained in Art. 2 1.a; does this include dance if not gardening?

14. Code of sports ethics (adopted in Rhodes, text available separately). Although perhaps the weakest of the texts reviewed here, the Code of sports ethics is the most far-reaching. It is perhaps also the most susceptible to further discussion. The present text is aimed at school-children, but there are clearly many other levels that should be involved. In the meantime the CDDS has well-judged its starting point (children) for introducing the subject on the European level. A direct and mediatised link should be made with Jean Borotra and the International association for fair-play. The occasions for doing this in the course of 1992 are fast running out.

D. CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE

15. In the field of sport, the transition from totalitarianism for countries of Central and Eastern Europe has meant inter alia drastic reductions in what was once considerable state funding, the privatisation (and subsequent non-availability) of sports facilities (gymnasia, playing fields etc), low priority to sport in legislation programming, and in certain cases a loss of national prestige. This last point has been poignantly illustrated by the anonymity of the CIS in the 1992 Olympics and in the European Cup in Sweden.

16. Our former CSFR colleague, Vladimir Mikan, has appealed both in committee and at the Rhodes Sports Ministers Conference for insistence on retaining governmental presence in the field of sport. This justified need goes against the previous Western trend to insist on the minimisation of government involvement. Both should be reconciled in terms of government responsibility to ensure that due provision is made.

17. Three key areas can be identified: sensibilisation of political opinion, assistance in the drafting of legislation, information of sport for all provision. The Council of Europe can contribute on all these levels. The Assembly should become more active in assistance to Central and Eastern Europe (in this as in other fields) and should co-ordinate its contribution more directly with that available from other parts of the Council of Europe. For example the Assembly could join with the CDDS in seminars aimed at bringing together those involved in the legislation process in Central and Eastern European countries.

18. The role of the local and regional authorities should also be included. This is a question to be pursued with the CLRAE.

E. EUROPEAN COMMUNITY

19. The 1985 Addonino report on "A people's Europe" advocated sport as a means of promoting the EEC's "Europe". Its economic and social relevance to EEC are also evident. Considerable discussion has taken place with Ministers (at both EEC and Council of Europe levels), sports representatives and the CDDS (meeting with Commission representatives in Brussels). The result has been the Communication of the EEC Commission on "The European Community and Sport" (SEC (91) 1438 final of 31 July 1991). Sport is seen (a) as a way of "strengthening ordinary people's sense of belonging to the Community" and (b) as part of Community action on matters such as health, the environment, consumer protection, tourism, transport and education. A European Community Sports Forum has been constituted (Brussels December 1991) in order to:

- keep sporting authorities informed on Community rules having an impact on sport;

- keep the EEC Commission informed by the sporting world so as to orientate its activities;

- advise the EEC Commission of areas where Community action on sport would be fruitful.

20. In its treatment of sport as a professional, economic activity and in concentrating on the economic and social aspects, the European Community can make an appropriate contribution. We can also welcome that the field has been left open for wider intergovernmental co-operation in other areas to the CDDS. This is of course only a provisional position as the Brussels Commission can always change its position if other arrangements are not judged satisfactory. The principle of "subsidiarity" cuts both ways.

21. The propaganda use the EEC intends openly to make of sport is less acceptable. In the Olympic context a political statement such as the dance of flags in the Albertville opening ceremony is in contravention of the Olympic Charter. There is the further political objection that such a statement presents a "Europe" that is not the Europe of cultural co-operation. A last objection might be lodged by the European taxpayer unhappy to pay the cost of advertising the EEC in such circumstances (at a cost of some $20 million). Similar arguments can be developed against the EEC label in other contexts (sporting or cultural).

22. The EEC Commission in Brussels seems well aware of the embarrassing problems posed by the imposition of European Community rules in the field of sport (composition of national teams, mobility of professionals, sponsorship, etc). These rules are even more difficult to sustain when other European (but non-EEC) countries or nationals are involved.

23. To summarise, in the specific field of European sports co-operation the European Community as such does not appear to be proposing to reduplicate Council of Europe activity. The Community is treating sport as an economic and social activity and source of propaganda; it is also dealing with the problems raised, for example as a result of its insistence on professional mobility. The EEC Commission and CDDS can at least be congratulated on clarifying their respective roles.

F. SPECIFIC PROBLEMS

24. The problem of access to the countryside for sports and other leisure activities has been brought to our attention in a motion initiated by Mr Mikan CSFR (Doc. 6622). It was perceived by him in terms of the failure of new sports legislation in Central and Eastern Europe to keep pace with planning, ownership and environmental pressures. Reference has already been made to this concern in section D above. Access to the countryside is also however a general European problem. The key aspect is already indicated in the motion -the importance of sustainable development; and this is also reflected in the European Sports Charter. Sports and other leisure use of the countryside should be integrated in planning for the overall use of the areas in question. But we should not blind ourselves to the fact that, given over-production in the agricultural sector in the European Community, the viability of uplands for agricultural use is being seriously questioned and their development for tourism advocated.

25. In Rhodes the Greek Minister for Sport made a proposal for the classification of sites associated with sport. He was referring to Olympia and the possibility of securing some sort of permanent centre for sport. As far as the Olympic Games are concerned, this has been ruled out by the IOC (replying therefore also to Assembly Recommendation 900 of 1980 on the Olympic Games and the outlook for their future). On the other hand the latest Greek proposal merits wider reflection: serious concern has been expressed for example as to the survival of the Grand National racecourse at Aintree (United Kingdom). There are many other "hauts lieux" of international sport that should perhaps be classified as protected sites. This notion could be linked to the work of the CDDS on traditional games.

26. We should welcome the end to racism in sport with the return of South Africa to international sport and the Olympic Games. This problem has been the subject of several papers of the European Sports Ministers and the Assembly.

27. Three major problems continue to concern all those involved in sport. The first is that of violence, whether on or off the field of play. The efforts of the committee monitoring the European Convention can be applauded but the problem continues to lie far deeper in European society as a whole. This is an interdisciplinary issue and the Council of Europe is better suited than most bodies for pursuing it as such. Although sport is often cited as an example of violence in society, it can also provide the most impressive examples of how to contain aggression through fair play. The Code of sports ethics adopted in Rhodes should be an incentive for further work in this field by the CDDS (see Assembly Recommendation 963 of 1983). The Assembly has still to receive an adequate response to its recommendation against boxing (Recommendation 1047); this is very much still a live issue as only recently the British Medical Association has renewed pressure to outlaw this so-called sport.

28. The problem of drugs has received considerable attention, and not least in the course of the summer Olympic Games. While the view of drugs as a form of cheating has gained ground, there remains confusion and divergencies over what might count as drugs and who might be tested. A new danger is that the authority of the sporting bodies might increasingly be challenged in the courts (Krabbe case). Fortunately the Council of Europe (CDDS) and IOC are co-operating closely in this field.

29. Another fundamental problem is that of money in sport. The Olympic Games continue to attract criticism for their commercialisation of sport. It is to be regretted that considerations of this nature seem to have prevailed in the choice of Atlanta for the 1996 Olympics rather than the historically more justifiable bid put forward by Greece. The tactics adopted by the Berlin authorities in their attempt at the 2000 Olympics are simply despicable. In these situations it is last of all a matter of sport. We are often hearing of astronomical transfer fees, match bonuses and the corruption involved in local football clubs. Reassuringly participating athletes are beginning to react against the staggering profits they can make from tournaments and related advertising in mediatised sports. Considerable attention must be focused therefore on the next informal meeting of European Sports Ministers which has been convened to discuss the subject of money in sport (Strasbourg 1993). It will be interesting to see how far sponsors can be encouraged to work for cleaner sport.

G. CONCLUSIONS

30. European sports co-operation is proceeding well. The Council of Europe structures (co-ordinated through the CDDS) provide an effective basis for contacts at political, technical and sporting levels. A satisfactory working relationship has also been established with the European Community and other international organisations in the field. there remain problems, notably in developing sports provision in Central and Eastern Europe, in combatting violence and reacting against the over-commercialisation of sport. Particular attention should be paid to the texts adopted by the Conference of European Sports Ministers in Rhodes: the new European Sports Charter and the Code of Sports Ethics.

* * *

See separately "The Council of Europe's work on sport 1967-91"

(two volumes) and the texts adopted at the 7th Conference of European Ministers responsible for Sport (Rhodes 13-15 May 1992) with the summary report on the conference: MSL-7 (92) 10 and 11.

Reporting committee: Committee on Culture and Education.

Budgetary implications for the Assembly: None.

Reference to committee: standing mandate of the committee.

Draft recommendation and order: Unanimously adopted by the committee on 1 September 1992.

Members of the committee: Mrs Fischer (Chairman), Mr de Puig, Sir Russell Johnston (Vice-Chairmen), MM. Alegre, Arnalds, Bauer, Berg, Berti (Alternate: Cardelli), Bonnici, Bratinka, Cem (Alternate:

Ms Özver), Danev, Dhaille (Alternate: Beix), Mrs Err, Mrs Fleeetwood, MM. Galanos (Alternate: Hadjidemetriou), Gül, Mrs Hawlicek,

MM. Hunault, Lemoine, Liapis, Lady Lockwood, MM. Lopez Henares, Malachowski, Mezzapesa, Mikan, Monfils (Alternate: Sarens), Muehlemann, Müller, O'Keeffe (Alternate: Ferris), Pahtas, Mrs Parkanova,

Mrs Persson, MM. Pilarski, Rauti (Alternate: Colombo), Mrs Robert,

Mr Roseta, Mrs Ryynanen, MM. Schädler, Schmidt, Scovacricchi, Seeuws (Alternate: Ghesquière), Soell, Sir Keith Speed (Alternate: Jessel), Ms Szelenyi, MM. Tummers, Verbeek (Alternate: Mrs Verpaget).

NB: The names of those members who took part in the vote are underlined.

Secretaries to the committee: MM. Grayson and Ary.