Swimming: Sparc cool with glacial change

Jan Cameron. File photo / Kenny Rodger

Next week marks two months since Swimming New Zealand received the damning Ineson Report, but there has been no discernible change within the sport's governing body and there appears to be no immediate threat to funding from Sparc.

The report outlined a lack of leadership within the organisation and suggested steps to right the blight that has beset SNZ's high-performance department. Of 86 people in the sport interviewed, 91 per cent saw the poor culture of the governing body as a significant barrier to success at the London Olympics and 83 per cent criticised the leadership of SNZ and the high-performance programme.

During the past month the focus has shifted from backroom management to poolside, with the country's top swimmers trying to set Olympic qualifying times at the world championships in Shanghai.

However, changes in the sport's leadership structure are still required as an Ineson Report recommendation to guarantee further Sparc funding into next year and beyond.

Sparc wants at least one medal and five finals to justify next year's $1.65 million of continued high-performance investment. However, last week Sparc chief executive Peter Miskimmin indicated a short-term reprieve was imminent when he said they were satisfied with the measures taken to orchestrate change and had confirmed funding until the end of the year. That makes sense. It is election year and Sparc, as a government-funded organisation, will be keen to exercise damage limitation for any further SNZ fallout. That might yet be tested if, as has been forecast, the SNZ regions convene a special general meeting in the coming weeks to cite a lack of confidence in the board.

The report also recommended forming a high-performance governance committee (HPGC). That has happened, but in a document produced by the new committee titled "SNZ Performance and Pathways Programme Proposed Staffing Re-alignment", there appears no great urgency to change.

The document suggests a timeline for events which would restructure the current high-performance programme by October 1. Feedback from those involved in the sport - plenty of which was already compiled by the Ineson Report - is listed as the current objective.

Those responses will be considered then presented to the SNZ board by August 18 with new roles advertised later in the month, followed by the completion of interviews and appointments at the end of next month.

Considering the HPGC has already had almost two months to reach this point, the progress is glacial. The HPGC wants to create two positions to replace Jan Cameron's general manager of performance and pathways role.

The first is an Olympic campaign manager (salary $85,000-$95,000) to look after the team's preparation and participation at the games. The second is an athlete support and development manager (salary $65,000-$75,000). Initial talk suggested Cameron might be considered for the campaign manager role as a compromise to ease her out of SNZ.

The difficulty lies in finding good candidates not employed elsewhere in an Olympic programme. They have to be prepared to dedicate themselves to a struggling sport for 10 months with no guarantee of longevity post-Olympics.