We don’t need a monument, we need football talent

(published in the daily SME)

Even editors at leading national newspapers can’t agree on whether to welcome the government’s decision to support the construction of the National Football Stadium in Bratislava or to criticize it. While sports editors welcome the state subsidy, political commentators reject it, citing wasteful use of public funds. It is undoubtedly good news that after years of delay, Slovakia is finally set to build a football stadium that meets federation standards. However, the approach chosen by the government cannot be considered standard practice.

Probably can’t be done without the state
The Slovak Football Association made a perfectly legitimate request for funding from the state budget to build the stadium, as in Slovak conditions, state involvement in such an investment is almost certainly necessary. In 2006, the Dzurinda government responded by adopting a strategy for constructing sports infrastructure of national importance (Resolution 588/2006), a document co-authored by the writers of this article. According to this strategy, it is in the state's interest that Slovakia’s national teams have a proper venue for international matches.

The strategy clearly stated that the best offer should be selected through a state-administered competition, with criteria such as minimum stadium capacity, safety standards, proximity to an international airport, existing transport infrastructure, and sufficient hotel accommodations across various categories. Had a public competition been held and a single bidder offered to build the stadium at Tehelné Pole for the announced price, the government’s subsidy would have been fully justified.

After the elections, however, the new government canceled the strategy. For three years, the cabinet and top officials dodged the issue until ministers eventually approved nearly 70 million euros for the stadium -without any competition. The government took a similar approach with the multipurpose arena. Yet in other sectors, competitive bidding usually results in lower prices. And it’s not just about the absence of an architectural competition, something Slovak architects rightly criticize. There was no competition to determine the stadium’s location or the financing model either.

It remains unclear why the government preferred an assessment of the site prepared by the subsidy applicant rather than defining its own terms in a public tender. Nor is it clear why the government did not seek to involve private capital in the stadium’s construction, as it did with highways and the National Tennis Centre. After all, unlike roads, sports venues can potentially generate significant revenue.

One reform Slovakia has still not managed to implement is sports reform. One of its key principles is that the state should prioritize supporting sports participation and actual activities—not just institutions or infrastructure investments. By 2012, both a hockey arena and a football stadium may be completed, but that won’t automatically translate into national team success. And it certainly won’t result in more frequent youth participation or an increase in athletic talent.

Roughly one billion Slovak crowns (approximately 33 million euros) are allocated annually to sports in the state budget, and this figure hasn’t been adjusted for years - it’s losing its real value. Nevertheless, the state will pour more than three years’ worth of that annual budget into a single concrete project in one location. The sports community remains silent. Does it support the government’s actions? Many like to talk about encouraging youth participation, but the reality is quite different.

What do the Olympic Committee, sports confederations, and associations think? It’s not enough to organize national conferences, write reports, submit feedback, or debate national sports development programs that list dozens of top priorities. Nor is it enough to endlessly lobby for tax breaks and lottery proceeds for sports. The key question is this: why hasn’t the sports community at least attempted to redirect just one billion crowns from stadium subsidies toward state support for youth sports participation?

Jozef Tokos is a lawyer and sports manager, and served as an advisor to the Prime Minister from 2003 to 2006.
Ján Marušinec is an economist and was director of budget analysis at the Ministry of Finance from 2003 to 2006.