To the point

Is the solution for Slovak sport only to leave and represent another country? The issue was raised by the case of the Žampa brothers, alpine skiers. They complain that despite great results — for example, 5th and 6th place at the Sochi Olympics — they have not yet received the support from the state that they need. And if a season costs up to 400,000 euros, they have so far received nothing from the Slovak Ski Association. At least that’s how their father, who represents them, described the situation.

The association, of course, defends itself, claiming that while it requested 2 million euros from the state to support its activities, it actually received only a quarter of that — about half a million. And it allocated 11,000 euros to the Žampas. Is this case unique in Slovak sport or does it reflect wider problems — specifically issues with funding and relationships? We asked a sports analyst who was involved in preparing the Sports Act. Our guest for this discussion is Jozef Tokos. Good afternoon!

Good afternoon!

Mr. Tokos, is the current dispute about individual interests — whether it’s the staffing of the ski association or does it reflect broader problems in our sport? More specifically: is the situation in Slovak sport such that the only solution is to leave and represent another country? The Žampa brothers seem to imply that this is the case...

Adam Žampa represented Slovakia excellently at the Olympics. He is certainly a talent of Slovak skiing, and we don’t have many athletes like him. One cause of the dispute is definitely the poor internal relations between the Slovak Ski Association and this athlete, but similar issues have concerned other top skiers in the past...

For example, Zuzulová...

Exactly, so the Slovak Ski Association is not a model of a well-managed union, and in this case, I’ve seen conflicting media reports about the amount of funding athletes received. It is important to say that sports funding, or funding athletes, cannot be based on the needs of individual actors but should be seen from the perspective of the public interest. So if someone presents a need of 400,000 euros and has no other option but to leave to represent another country, that would indeed be a great pity, but it is a free decision. The state cannot intervene in the personnel or internal structure of the unions, so if something doesn’t work within the Slovak skiing movement, they must first sort it out themselves. As for the total amount of public money allocated to sport, the figure from the Ministry of Education’s budget has long been between 30 and 35 million euros, roughly a billion Slovak crowns, recently increased by football infrastructure funding. This is still low. On the other hand, sport is one of the few sectors that has not yet undergone significant reforms.

So, Mr. Tokoš, returning to the beginning, does the Žampa brothers’ case illustrate a general problem of funding or will it remain just an isolated incident?

There are several levels here. One is the internal relationships within the union...

Which you described as unhealthy.

Definitely unhealthy and for a long time. The second level is the relationship between the state and the unions regarding representation. The state’s natural partner is the sports union. The state must set rules according to which funding is distributed transparently and based on known criteria. This is somewhat problematic. At the central funding level, there are big issues. At the level of the Ministry of Education, a process was started after the work of my team in 2012, introducing a formula based on success, popularity, and the number of athletes under 18. The problem is that in the last three years, there have been no significant changes. The Sports Act remains only a promise.

So for the future, the key point is transparency in fund distribution according to clear criteria. Would that “solve” the situation or is something else needed?

It certainly won’t solve the situation so that all sports unions and athletes are satisfied because everyone will want more. This is a long-observed phenomenon in Slovak sport...

Before that, there’s the fact that there is too little money, right? Even though public funding is still increasing?

Yes.

For example, over the five years since 2011, the state subsidy increased by about half; today there is about 45 million euros in the state budget for sport, previously around 25 million.

This is mainly because of the football infrastructure project, which increased the amount for infrastructure of national importance. After necessary changes in Slovak sport funding — decisions that I believe can be made in the first six months of any new government — such as opening the question of merging sectoral centres. I cannot imagine that happening in the last year or half year of a government’s term. These decisions are broader in scope, cross-sectoral, and can help fix past distortions. For example, there has been no reform in how marketing money from Tipos is distributed — these funds are allocated without clear, transparent criteria.

So another source of funding for sport...

Exactly. A 20-year concept for Slovak sport was developed some time ago but has mostly remained in the Ministry of Education’s drawer...

So to conclude, more money, more transparency, and clear criteria for how funds are distributed?

Yes, clear, predefined criteria, which would apply not only to the Ministry of Education but to every euro of taxpayers’ money that flows through central budgets to sport. Then, after further changes — which could be part of the Sports Act — there is room to increase funding for sport.

That was Jozef Tokoš, sports analyst. Have a nice day!

You too, take care!