Pádraig Ó Céidigh (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I want to focus on the big picture but I will dive down a little bit to tie it all together. I see incredible passion in every one of the witnesses and that is very powerful. It is not surprising in the sports industry because that is part and parcel of what they do. I also perceive a certain degree of frustration at not being able to achieve the levels they want to achieve and which they believe Irish athletes can achieve. The two areas I will deal with are high performance and overall engagement participation rates. Both are joined at the hip because when a county wins an all-Ireland, Connacht wins the PRO12 or when people like John Treacy achieve what they achieve it lifts a nation, a region or a county like nothing else in our society. It brings positiveness in a way that is unique.

Funding levels have been cut since 2008. Sport Ireland has invested €34 million in high performance since London 2012 and invests €8.5 million per year but that is 20% of what New Zealand invests. We have finite resources and that will always be the case because we are a small country of 4.5 million people. It is not about throwing money at this, rather what is most important is how we spend that money. The questions asked by Senator O'Mahony were about value for money. Do we have joined-up thinking? Are there internal conflicts which cause issues that restrict us in achieving what we want to achieve? New Zealand has a similar population to us but spends €42.8 million per year while we spend €8.5 million. Britain sent 366 athletes to Rio and we sent 77. In Rio we ended up in 62nd place but in London we were 41st. Denmark has 5.7 million people and got 15 medals in Rio while we got two and New Zealand got 19 with a similar population to ours.

There are disjoints in a couple of areas. One is in finances and the other is 20 years ahead, as Ms Keane mentioned earlier. All we can do is try to bridge the gap. It is important to drill down to see what we are doing. What is the execution plan to help us to achieve that? Do the witnesses have information on overall engagement and participation rates? These are critically important and my sense is that more and more old fellows like myself are togging out and doing jogging or rowing, which I started about two years ago and in which there has been huge growth. Hamish Adams and others in Rowing Ireland are doing phenomenal work in that space and there are now 5,000 people in recreational rowing, with 3,000 in competition. Part of it is because of what the O'Donovan brothers achieved but it has been swelling up for a long period of time.

A study by Sheffield University last April made some key findings. It found that, from an overall health point of view, participation in sports and exercise at moderate intensity in adults reduces the risk of breast cancer in active women by 20%. That is incredible. The value to be gained in bringing overall well-being and health to the nation, as well as a general feel-good factor, is very much underestimated. The study also found that for every £1 invested in sport by the Government in 2013 and 2014, some £3.15 in social impact was generated. It is difficult to measure the social return on investment but these guys have done so and the return is powerful. I support the witnesses 100% but I have been to three Olympic Games as a mentor to athletes and I am concerned about some of the internal issues there are, as well as some of the frustrations the athletes feel. The funding they get is so much lower than other people on the track, in the pool or against whom they have to box. They are very dependent on family for finance and on corporates and business. Both of those step up to the plate in that regard but it is necessary because there is a gap in Government support.