Promoting Citizenship through Football:

[Frankie 505]

Regular RM/Newsnow readers will remember I submitted a full report into the failings of the ‘Sectarianism in Football Working Group’ – established in 2006 (a). This group - consisting of the Scottish Executive, the SFA, sportscotland, ACPOS, the SPL and the SFL - along with contributions from Rangers FC, Celtic FC and Glasgow University – reported on the effect Scottish football had on the social problem of sectarianism in Scotland. A wide range of action points were agreed by all parties involved to help address the issue.

Despite their obvious relevance to the subject, no fans were invited to take part other than the main office holders of fan associations which don’t always accurately represent the views all supporters. Certainly these fan associations didn’t seem to consult their members before commenting either.

In addition to this immediate constitutional failing it became obvious during the presentation of my report (b) to these various bodies that our constructive criticism of the working group was deemed not important enough to comment on.

None of the above bodies have offered to discuss the content of our report other than a generic intention to examine it and forward it to the new group: ‘Promoting Citizenship through Football’ - established in October 2008 [c]. Indeed, as author of the report, I have asked several times to be included in the new committee (or at the very least consulted with regard to its operations) but no further information has been received.

The main reason for our request to be included is because, bizarrely, the exact same bodies that made up the failed initial group are included once again in the new committee. That’s all well and good but given their lack of communication with ‘decent citizens’ and the obvious lack of imagination to include other qualified people/organisations (such as Michael Boyd of the Irish FA and the Police Service Of Northern Ireland), the credibility of the new group is immediately open to debate.

Furthermore, when one examines the new expanded financial remit of the PCTF group, this is where ‘decent citizens’ may start to get worried. £2.5million from the Scottish Government's Cashback (d) scheme until 2011, £0.6million to ‘tackle sectarianism and racism’, and only £0.07million to promote healthy living; suggests the group haven’t taken Sir David Murray’s quotes about sectarianism/racism being exaggerated while ignoring much more prevalent social problems such as obesity and drugs seriously (e). This is even stranger when the aims of the new group are mainly made up of addressing the more prevalent problems SDM mentions. How do they justify their allocation of funds?

And that is just one question which these government officials fail to answer. After all, considering sectarianism and racism is still happening at football (but hardly a huge problem comparatively speaking) the new quota of £125,000 to the failed (and rather dubious) anti-sectarianism ‘charity’ Nil by Mouth (f) is surely worthy of challenge by Scottish tax-payers. I say dubious because this ‘charity’ seems to pick and choose the issues they involve themselves with and didn’t even take the time to acknowledge or comment on the balanced report I sent them.

Add in an obvious imbalance in the way they approach their remit having been shown to show different attitudes depending on the background of the people who contact them, then tax-payers are quite correct to question their work. Just what do they do with their money apart from wasting it on calling back inaccurate DVDs? Another high-profile beneficiary of this money ‘Kick out Bigotry’ seem equally impotent and unresponsive to debate.

So where are PCTF’s money and resources going and how are they being used? Is the continual inaccurate and sensationalist coverage of the Scottish media being challenged? Are the fans not represented by member associations being surveyed? Are the police being forced to justify their actions as ‘aggravated breach of peace charges’ seem to be rising? Just when do clubs/fans break the new SPL ‘Unacceptable Conduct’ Rules? Why do the other action points agreed in 2006 remain incomplete?

All I see are more and more questions of the same tired people/organisations that have already shown they will fail when trusted with millions of pounds of public money. And when we ask these questions, we’re either ignored completely or patronised by governmental bureaucrats.

What is to be then? Are they really wanting to ‘Promote Citizenship’ or is this just another sham to further highlight the only secret shame in Scotland is that of her 'decent citizens' and 'decent football fans' continually being ignored by those they elect?

References:

(a) - http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/12/11144623/0

(b) - Please pm me if you would like a copy of my report (released in mid-2008)

[c] - http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2008/12/10145304

(d) - http://www.cashbackscotland.com/index.php?page=1.2

(e) - http://tinyurl.com/49xos4

(f) - http://news.scotsman.com/politics/SNP-thro...ty-a.4934351.jp

[AMMS 27]

This is political, the SNP are sensitive to Labour criticism on this subject, Labour are keen to play this up if only to shore up support in West Central Scotland constituencies they formally took for granted. By agreeing to this sop the SNP can rightly point to their support to 'eradicate sectarianism', the fact this barely affects the day-to-day lives of the majority of people is a fact worth ignoring for political expediency.

I admire your attempts to challenge this however I fear you are pushing water up hill. It is not in the organisations interest to eradicate sectarianism rather it is in their interest to show it is growing, that way they can qualify for more funding and bigger budgets and justify their existence.

If possible find a champion, preferably in the media or in politics. The media would be preferable and some journalists are contrary enough by nature that they might be interested in looking in to this.

Good luck.

[Sequimur 0]

Good job, Frankie.

[Frankie 505]

This is political, the SNP are sensitive to Labour criticism on this subject, Labour are keen to play this up if only to shore up support in West Central Scotland constituencies they formally took for granted. By agreeing to this sop the SNP can rightly point to their support to 'eradicate sectarianism', the fact this barely affects the day-to-day lives of the majority of people is a fact worth ignoring for political expediency.

I admire your attempts to challenge this however I fear you are pushing water up hill. It is not in the organisations interest to eradicate sectarianism rather it is in their interest to show it is growing, that way they can qualify for more funding and bigger budgets and justify their existence.

If possible find a champion, preferably in the media or in politics. The media would be preferable and some journalists are contrary enough by nature that they might be interested in looking in to this.

Good luck.

Definitely agree with all of that.

What I didn't write in the article is that I have had some agreement from one or two people in the media. I won't name them as I asked them to comment 'off-the-record' but I was certainly encouraged by their reaction. I'm hoping to cultivate something from that.

Politically I've not had a great deal of support but, depending on current affairs, obviously that could change. ACPOS have also been reasonably helpful but again not to the degree where I can count on their support on an official basis.

I will continue to lobby all the bodies involved for independent fans to be made part of (or at least consulted) by the committee. I suggest all interested bears do the same.

[Guest Andypendek]

Freaky, that's the first time someone has posted almost word for word what I was going to write. AMMS, I salute you! Not sure you'll be so pleased with the comparison, but anyway.

125k to NBM, is that more, less, or the same as they were getting? In all honesty it's a pittance so I take comfort from the fact that they get about the same as the Calton Lesbian LeafArt Project or whatever.

Politically, I don't see how anyone can touch this with a bargepole. Disagreeing with McConnel and his shite is one thing, actually saying it when there's a massive tim constituency out there who may - just MAY - be hyper sensitive to criticism, and MSP would be mental to go near it. Say nothing and wait for it to go away, that would be my advice. Nah, that's weak. I'll think of something better.

[Fixxxer 4]

Great post, and good luck

[Frankie 505]

125k to NBM, is that more, less, or the same as they were getting? In all honesty it's a pittance so I take comfort from the fact that they get about the same as the Calton Lesbian LeafArt Project or whatever.

Politically, I don't see how anyone can touch this with a bargepole. Disagreeing with McConnel and his shite is one thing, actually saying it when there's a massive tim constituency out there who may - just MAY - be hyper sensitive to criticism, and MSP would be mental to go near it. Say nothing and wait for it to go away, that would be my advice. Nah, that's weak. I'll think of something better.

Not sure if their budget has increased or descreased.

However, without tangible results, and when one considers the doubts about their credentials, then £125,000 is far too much. Couple that with the pittance going towards the genuine social problems highlighted by the committee, then it is a national disgrace.

I'm actually astounded no politician doesn't want to highlight that; block RC vote or not.

[CanadianBacon 2,088]

Many valid points made re' this debate and well done to Frankie (for having the patience, for one thing, to deal with some of these people).

For Nil By Mouth read 'Social Work department' - for 'Social Work department' read 'Filled To The Brim With Roman Catholics At The Very Top'.

As someone else said, it's the equivalent of pushing (holy?) water up a hill.

Good luck with it nevertheless.

[Guest Andypendek]

I should think a Scottish Conservative, with their horror of public funding, would be the best bet.

[AMMS 27]

Freaky, that's the first time someone has posted almost word for word what I was going to write. AMMS, I salute you! Not sure you'll be so pleased with the comparison, but anyway.

You know my wife bought me Meet Glen Campbell for Christmas as well....I may well be your doppelgänger, I apologise, this may end any credibility you have on here!

[Frankie 505]

Many valid points made re' this debate and well done to Frankie (for having the patience, for one thing, to deal with some of these people).

For Nil By Mouth read 'Social Work department' - for 'Social Work department' read 'Filled To The Brim With Roman Catholics At The Very Top'.

As someone else said, it's the equivalent of pushing (holy?) water up a hill.

Good luck with it nevertheless.

I'm one person that thinks we make our own luck in life.

190 people have viewed this thread on here. Hundreds more elsewhere. Imagine if all the bears amongst that number emailed their MP, emailed the Scottish Government and used the phone-ins to raise the subject of why such a balanced and proactive 'decent citizen' has been largely ignored. I reckon we wouldn't be so easy to dismiss or patronise then.

Rangers fans do a lot of complaining about certain subjects. All well and good but it has to be followed up with hard work if you want the issue changed. Patience, frustration and disappointment will be factors. But if that means a bit more luck, then, yes it is worth it!