Soon the
Paralympics will begin, although some things will not be quite the same as
aspects of the other Olympics. The
picture above is that of Stoke Mandeville Station to which I once sent many
parcels and some passengers.
It is
reported that Usain Bolt, one of the heroes of the track has announced that
unless the UK changes its
tax laws relating to earnings made in the UK by those from overseas in sport
and entertainment he may not return here.
One of the
lesser known features of the recent Games is that amongst the Diktats laid down
by the International Olympics Committee for the UK to be hosts was a temporary
revocation of these taxation requirements.
The irony
of athletes only being willing to compete if the taxation deals were right in
an event largely paid for out of either present taxation or future taxation in
the form of state borrowing seems to have lost on Mr. Bolt and perhaps others.
I wonder
whether some of the joy and rapture shown by the sports men and women on
winning medals may have had something to do with future sponsorship deals and
media rights. Those of us who follow UK
soccer will know full well that these issues are often critical to which player
joins which club.
The BBC ran
a programme related to the Paralympics centring on Dr. Ludwig Guttman at the
Stoke Mandeville Hospital in the 1940’s and later and his work on enabling
seriously injured and handicapped persons to engage in ordinary activities
including games and sports.
This was
allied to other neurological work done in other places in the search to give
not just life but a meaningful one within the community to all those suffering
from severe impairments for one thing and another. The implications of this were far from fully
realised at the time or even now to a great extent.
Around
forty years ago in the early 1970’s because of new facilities being created for
the education of the handicapped I attended a conference at Stoke Mandeville
about the developments that were in train in that field and what the future
might hold.
It was
becoming apparent that not only were many children now surviving but often
their expectation of life was rising.
Once having a severe handicap would have meant either an early death or
a very limited lifespan with little capability.
All this
was about to change. With a little
knowledge of demographics and statistics it dawned on me that the long term
implications were much greater than most people realised. It was not just a question of more money and
a few more local specialist facilities; it was a lot bigger than that.
Whilst
those of us who could run the figures, work out some of the logistics and
recognise the wider social and employment considerations realised that it was
going to become a lot more complex and changes would follow across the board it
was very difficult to get others to accept just how much would have to be done.
The trouble
was that while politicians were happy to use the handicapped for vote winning
photo opportunities or being seen to be “do gooding” when shove came to push
there were always well down the agenda for much in the way of real progress.
If the
Paralympics allows some realisation of the much greater and wider needs than
those of forty years ago it might have some benefit. Although those taking part I suspect will not
need any major tax breaks.
Only some
recognition of their capabilities and the potential contribution they might
make.
Here in the US where Darwinism(the social type) is enshrined as a central tenet of the political parties (the Democrats are more tasteful in their delivery), the abilities and the contributions of the handicapped are given only the finest lip service.
ReplyDelete"If the Paralympics allows some realisation of the much greater and wider needs than those of forty years ago it might have some benefit."
ReplyDeleteI suspect it won't change much. Only personal experience seems to make a difference.
All the above applies with equal force to the aged.
ReplyDelete