Sports funding to be slashed by 15 per cent

Plans for 15 per cent cuts in Warwick Sport left student clubs reeling last week.

At an emergency meeting on Wednesday, the Students’ Union announced that the University is proposing to reduce funding to the Department of Physical Education and Sport by £210,000.

In a decision that could be made as early as this week, the University is also considering the introduction of a compulsory fee for sports administration.

This would be commensurate with a rise of 60 per cent in the cost of Warwick Sport membership for students, £20 more than the current charge.

Reacting angrily to the proposals, citing fears that sports participation would become prohibitive to students, the Students’ Union has sought to highlight the detrimental consequences that they believe would come from the plans.

Terry Marshall, the Union’s Sports Officer told the Boar, “We recognise the need for all departments to contribute to the University’s £12 million worth of savings but hitting the Department of PE and Sport disproportionately will have a severe impact on all Warwick Sport members, on our clubs and on the accessibility to sport at Warwick”.

Whilst the University has demanded budget cuts of 5 per cent across the board for all departments, the Sports department may have its budget cut by three times that figure.

It is this perceived inequality which has concerned the Students’ Union.

However, Marshall remains ambivalent about the effectiveness of the Union’s response to the proposals.

He believed that the Union would be effective in demonstrating students’ views through its online campaign ‘Support our Sports (SOS)’, but he “didn’t know” whether their endeavours would be successful given the lack of a consultation period.

At the end of week seven, the Union “got wind” of the proposals, but was originally told in confidence.

Placing emphasis on the “good relationship” between the University’s Director of Sport, he defended the decision for not starting the ‘SOS’ campaign earlier and only informing students last week.

The University’s official spokesman has also maintained that the Union has been “kept informed about these proposals”.

In a statement to the Boar, Peter Dunn defended the University’s plans, claiming that Warwick’s level of charges for the uses of its sports facilities is currently far below many of its competitors:

“For our fitness suite we charge students £50 a year plus an annual access charge of £34. The level of charge for this at Loughborough is £170 a year at Bath it is £345 and at Birmingham £178.”

“The University has ensured that, since its inception, the income generated by Warwick Sport is retained by Warwick Sport with no contribution from it to the University to pay the costs of the Department. This is not the case in most universities.”

He also admitted that the decision to reduce funding maybe a fait accompli:

“The University is seeking to reduce the Gross deficit (i.e. the direct costs of activity) by increasing income by £210,000 in 2009/10. After this the University will be still contributing £1.285m towards the costs of sport. Physical Education and Sport has benefited from increases in investment (such as the new Tennis Centre) over recent years at a time when other administrative departments were required to make savings.”

Yet, some speakers at Wednesday’s emergency Sports Council Meeting in Bar Rouge just before Score were worried that Warwick Sport would become an organisation “Only for the rich, only for the best”.

Another speaker at the meeting attended by sports clubs’ presidents and treasurers thought that it would even be unconstitutional for the University to levy an additional £20 through Warwick students.

Ben Jones, President of Warwick Windsurf believed that smaller clubs would be worse hit by the cuts:

“Smaller societies such as mine will feel it more; people may not want to try windsurfing if it’s too expensive to join”.

He added: “New blood is vital to our survival. It may be inexorable that Sport will have to succumb to some cutbacks due to the economic climate […] but there is little reason for a focus on what would seem to be the more politically expedient Department of Sport”.

Ivan Kisyov, President of WarwickSnow, was worried that students would be put off from going on the popular snow tour if they had to incur an even greater cost for the necessary Warwick Sport membership.

There are still questions concerning the impact of the proposed £210,000 cut.

When questioned by RaW News at the Sports Council Meeting, Marshall remained elusive about where even the minimum requisite 5% cut could fall, despite the requirement being common knowledge since the beginning of April.

However, he thought that it would not be possible to make any additional savings in the administration of Warwick Sport without affecting service levels.

He also feared that the 10,000 members needed to counter the shortfall of funding may not materialise, and therefore the financial situation could actually be worse.

Vice Chancellor Thrift, who took agreed not accept a pay increase in April, retaining his salary level at approximately £220,000, has required that all departments find 5% savings so that the University may return to surplus.

Despite the fact that the University may finish the year with the highest ever level of donations, the decline in commercial activity has had a strong adverse effect on the institution’s finances.