Agenda and minutes

Councillor Clair, the Task Group Leader, welcomed all present to the meeting and introductions were made.

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Lloyd-Harris.

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business on the agenda, and/or indicate that Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 applies to them.

No declarations were made.

To note the Terms of Reference for this review, as set out below: -

·        To analyse the work that was undertaken in the attempt to secure commercial sponsorship for SOL 2009 and the reasons why the attempt was unsuccessful;

·        To assess whether all efforts were made to obtain commercial sponsorship;

·        To evaluate whether the expectations to raise up to £3m in commercial sponsorship was an achievable aim at that point in time;

·        To evaluate alternative ways of securing funding that could have been explored and to identify lessons learned to improve the chances of securing commercial sponsorship for similar events in the future.

AGREED:

that the Terms of Reference for this review be noted.

Question areas for the evidence session are attached at Appendix A.

The Task Group welcomed the following people to the meeting, who had attended to provide evidence:-

·            Richard Watson – Director of Cultural Services, Leicester City Council

·            Ted Cassidy – Chair, Leicester Games 2009 Ltd

·            Tim Davies – Vice-Chair, Leicester Games 2009 Ltd

·            Nick Townsend – Board Member, Leicester Games 2009 Ltd

·            Nev Hammond – Financial Advisor, Leicester Games 2009 Ltd

Introduction

Ted Cassidy reminded the Task Group that Leicester Games 2009 Ltd was a company that was independent of the Council.

The Board and organising committee had two main objectives, namely to show that Leicester could stage a world-class event and, through the efforts of the athletes, to showcase what those with learning disabilities could achieve. 

A third objective had been to not just have one memorable week of sport, but create a lasting legacy for the participants and the City.  An added benefit was that it was estimated that the Special Olympics had generated an estimated income of £2.8 million for the City and surrounding area.

The financial process had been professionally managed.  A formal structure had been put in place and financial plans had been drawn up.  Through competitive tendering, the First Rights company was appointed to obtain sponsorship for the Games and, when the continuous monitoring undertaken showed that it could be difficult to obtain all of the sponsorship needed, an alternative budget was put in place.

Although First Rights continued to pursue sponsorship, Leicester Games Ltd identified a date by which it knew it would either have to cancel the Games or find further finance.  At the end of 2008, Leicester Games Ltd therefore requested an immediate meeting with the Leader of Leicester City Council to discuss the situation.  As a result of this, agreement was reached that the Council would underwrite the Games for up to £1.2 million.

Continued efforts were made to find alternative sources of funding and all expenditure continued to be monitored and challenged by Leicester Games 2009 Ltd’s finance committee.  All discussions regarding this were fully minuted.

A Games evaluation report had been prepared, to show what had been learned from the Games.

The Task Group acknowledged that the objectives set by Leicester Games 2009 Ltd in relation to making the Games a success and changing people’s perceptions of those with learning difficulties were achieved.  However, the Task Group wanted to learn any lessons it could from Leicester Games 2009 Ltd’s experiences.

Question 1 – How were the costs of hosting the Special Olympics arrived at?

Richard Watson advised the Task Group that it initially had been estimated that the Games would cost £3 million.  It was assumed that athletes would contribute £1 million and the rest would be met through sponsorship and other funding.  There was an aspirational budget of £4.8 million.  However, it soon became clear that sufficient sponsorship would not be forthcoming to use this budget.

Leicester Games Ltd established a finance sub-committee to look at sponsorship and funding for the Games and this established that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The meeting adjourned at 1.00 pm and Ted Cassidy (Chair, Leicester Games 2009 Ltd), Tim Davies (Vice-Chair, Leicester Games 2009 Ltd), Nick Townsend (Board Member, Leicester Games 2009 Ltd) and Nev Hammond (Financial Advisor, Leicester Games 2009 Ltd) left the meeting.

The meeting reconvened at 1.06 pm

Members are asked to reach conclusions based on the evidence received.

The Task Group drew the conclusions set out below, in relation to its terms of reference.

·            To assess whether all efforts were made to obtain commercial sponsorship

The Task Group felt that, from the evidence received, all reasonable efforts had been made to obtain commercial sponsorship, although these efforts had not been fully explained previously.  The actions taken were the correct ones in the circumstances at the time.

·            To evaluate whether the expectations to raise up to £3M in commercial sponsorship was an achievable aim at that point in time

The Task Group accepted that Leicester Games Ltd had a genuine intent to raise the sponsorship specified and belief that this could be done.  However, on the evidence provided, it was difficult to take a considered view on whether the expectations at the outset were realistic.

Leicester Games Ltd had a range of plans that it had worked through.  However, various problems were encountered during the planning stages.  For example, First Rights was close to gaining a major sponsor for the Games, but the lack of links with the 2012 Olympic Games prevented this.

The Task Group expressed its interest in receiving, and giving consideration to, the report being prepared by Leicester and De Montfort Universities on the impact and legacy of the event.  It was noted that this was due to be published in September 2010.

In conclusion, the Task Group suggested that the event needed to continue, but current arrangements were not suitable for future Games.  Funding needed to follow the athletes, rather than the hosts being so heavily reliant on commercial sponsorship, and it was an inappropriate expectation that one city could host the Games on its own.  Alternative arrangements therefore could be considered, such as the Games being hosted on a regional basis, (or in close co-operation with other authorities in a region), using government funding, and with greater support from appropriate national organising bodies.

The Task Group believed that people with learning disabilities should be recognised explicitly in grant funding for sports and suggested that a letter could be sent to the Minister for Sport, the Minister for Disability and Special Olympics Great Britain asking that consideration be given to the points raised above.

·            To evaluate alternative ways of securing funding that could have been explored and to identify lessons learned to improve the chances of securing commercial sponsorship for similar events in the future

The wide range of activities undertaken to attract sponsorship to the Games from local, national and international sponsors was recognised.  Given the restrictions on the time available, it was felt that it would have been extremely difficult to undertaken any further activities.  It also was recognised that the possibility had been considered of obtaining insurance against a loss through lack of sponsorship.  However, if a similar event was hosted in the future, it would be useful to undertake more extensive risk assessments at the outset of the planning phase.

The Task Group considered that, on the advice and guidance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The meeting closed at 1.38 pm