UK government threaten budget cuts to UKADA

[Brullnux]

Great news. Now literally zero British athletes will ever be found positive in the UK, probably creating a doping safe haven. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/athletics/34619576

 

[Catwhoorg]

A levy of 1% of any TV sports rights sold in the UK put straight into a fund for UKAD would fix that hole and then some.

The whole public sector is facing pretty harsh cuts, whilst I am anti-doping, I don't think UKAD should be ring fenced in that regard.

 

[gooner]

Agree.

There is far more important things in life for a government to invest in and in an era where the purse strings are tight, I don't think criticism should be directed their way as a result of this.

We've seen the same over here in cuts to the Irish Sports Council and it's totally understandable in the circumstances.

 

[the sceptic]

Great news. Now literally zero British athletes will ever be found positive in the UK, probably creating a doping safe haven. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/athletics/34619576

To be fair, the UK hardly test anyone to begin with so I doubt this makes much difference. Remember the WADA statistics shows they don't even try to catch anyone. Russia is leading the fight against doping at the moment.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Apparently none of you read their annual reports. What were their unaudited "Key performance indicators for 2014/15?" Not testing.

Since there is very little anti-doping transparency in the UK, it's hard to find a reason why UKAD should be State funded. It's a proxy organization for the sports federations anyway.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Great news. Now literally zero British athletes will ever be found positive in the UK, probably creating a doping safe haven. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/athletics/34619576

Maybe UK can get the Chinese to pay for this as well....

 

[roundabout]

Easiest 2 million ever cut.

 

[the sceptic]

Easiest 2 million ever cut.

no point wasting money on testing clean athletes

 

[gooner]

It doesn't matter about their testing stats and the amount of positives. Their are bigger priorities for the UK government to address in more important aspects of society and within their existing budget framework, if anti-doping funding needs to be cut, then so be it.

The Irish Sports Council were also complaining about their funding being cut and this in an environment with the IMF in the country where savage cuts have been implemented across the board to the public sector, middle class and social welfare recipients.

Anyway who thinks funding anti-doping shouldn't be cut in these circumstances isn't living in the real world. You're stuck in a bubble.

Period.

 

[Benotti69]

The sports should be funding the anti-doping not governments. It should be seen as a type of levy. Sports should by law require to test a %(min 51%) of its competitors x number of times a year and each athlete 3 times.

 

[roundabout]

Re:

It doesn't matter about their testing stats and the amount of positives. Their are bigger priorities for the UK government to address in more important aspects of society and within their existing budget framework, if anti-doping funding needs to be cut, then so be it.

The Irish Sports Council were also complaining about their funding being cut and this in an environment with the IMF in the country where savage cuts have been implemented across the board to the public sector, middle class and social welfare recipients.

Anyway who thinks funding anti-doping shouldn't be cut in these circumstances isn't living in the real world. You're stuck in a bubble.

Period.

Will government funding of sports in the UK be cut by the same percentage? There are much bigger savings possible there.

It would send a wrong message if only the anti-doping side of the government sport funding is being cut.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

It doesn't matter about their testing stats and the amount of positives. Their are bigger priorities for the UK government to address in more important aspects of society and within their existing budget framework, if anti-doping funding needs to be cut, then so be it.

The Irish Sports Council were also complaining about their funding being cut and this in an environment with the IMF in the country where savage cuts have been implemented across the board to the public sector, middle class and social welfare recipients.

Anyway who thinks funding anti-doping shouldn't be cut in these circumstances isn't living in the real world. You're stuck in a bubble.

Period.

Will government funding of sports in the UK be cut by the same percentage? There are much bigger savings possible there.

It would send a wrong message if only the anti-doping side of the government sport funding is being cut.

If you are a British based athlete it sends out a 'positive' message!

 

[the sceptic]

Re:

It doesn't matter about their testing stats and the amount of positives. Their are bigger priorities for the UK government to address in more important aspects of society and within their existing budget framework, if anti-doping funding needs to be cut, then so be it.

The Irish Sports Council were also complaining about their funding being cut and this in an environment with the IMF in the country where savage cuts have been implemented across the board to the public sector, middle class and social welfare recipients.

Anyway who thinks funding anti-doping shouldn't be cut in these circumstances isn't living in the real world. You're stuck in a bubble.

Period.

So what you are saying is that society should be fine with massive amounts of money being wasted on creating sporting heroes for the public to worship, but spending a tiny percentage of this money to make sure said heroes are following the rules is not ok. This makes no sense to me.

Period.

 

[Brullnux]

Re:

It doesn't matter about their testing stats and the amount of positives. Their are bigger priorities for the UK government to address in more important aspects of society and within their existing budget framework, if anti-doping funding needs to be cut, then so be it.

The Irish Sports Council were also complaining about their funding being cut and this in an environment with the IMF in the country where savage cuts have been implemented across the board to the public sector, middle class and social welfare recipients.

Anyway who thinks funding anti-doping shouldn't be cut in these circumstances isn't living in the real world. You're stuck in a bubble.

Period.

Cuts wouldn't be necessary with a mildly functioning government,

2 million pounds is pennies anyway.

 

[pastronef]

Re: Re:

It doesn't matter about their testing stats and the amount of positives. Their are bigger priorities for the UK government to address in more important aspects of society and within their existing budget framework, if anti-doping funding needs to be cut, then so be it.

The Irish Sports Council were also complaining about their funding being cut and this in an environment with the IMF in the country where savage cuts have been implemented across the board to the public sector, middle class and social welfare recipients.

Anyway who thinks funding anti-doping shouldn't be cut in these circumstances isn't living in the real world. You're stuck in a bubble.

Period.

So what you are saying is that society should be fine with massive amounts of money being wasted on creating sporting heroes for the public to worship, but spending a tiny percentage of this money to make sure said heroes are following the rules is not ok. This makes no sense to me.

Period.

surely "society" gets a much bigger economic return creating sporting heroes for the public instead of busting them. the big public cares just a bit about the rules, even less if home athletes are involved

 

[gooner]

Re: Re:

It doesn't matter about their testing stats and the amount of positives. Their are bigger priorities for the UK government to address in more important aspects of society and within their existing budget framework, if anti-doping funding needs to be cut, then so be it.

The Irish Sports Council were also complaining about their funding being cut and this in an environment with the IMF in the country where savage cuts have been implemented across the board to the public sector, middle class and social welfare recipients.

Anyway who thinks funding anti-doping shouldn't be cut in these circumstances isn't living in the real world. You're stuck in a bubble.

Period.

So what you are saying is that society should be fine with massive amounts of money being wasted on creating sporting heroes for the public to worship, but spending a tiny percentage of this money to make sure said heroes are following the rules is not ok. This makes no sense to me.

Period.

That is why I mention the Irish Sports Council example who oversee the testing and also distribute the grants and funding accordingly to each sport. Funding to sport was also cut.

Rightly so. We have bigger issues to deal with and so too do the UK government. Its got nothing to do with creating sporting heroes and protecting them. It's priorities and perspective.

Schools, health, international development and defence are protected so local government, Home Office, transport, environment, justice and the courts, arts and sports will be hammered by 25% and 40% cuts in November’s Spending Review.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/george-osborne-sharpens-axe-40-6111425

Maybe listen to Corbyn and get rid of trident.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

Will government funding of sports in the UK be cut by the same percentage? There are much bigger savings possible there.

It would send a wrong message if only the anti-doping side of the government sport funding is being cut.

Sports funding in the UK comes out of the Lottery purse, part of the rationale behind that being to make it independent of government policy.