The Scientific Service of the Bundestag comes to the conclusion that decisions about the funding of elite sport must remain with the government and parliament. This contradicts the coalition’s intention to transfer the promotion and control of top-level sport to an independent agency. The draft bill for a sports funding law is currently being voted on by the department.
The German Olympic Sports Confederation (DOSB) has distanced itself from this draft and announced that it would fight it. He complains about his role being reduced to advice and the dominance of state representatives in the agency.
“Third parties (particularly associations in the field of sport) may only be involved in the decision-making process in a technical advisory capacity,” says the presentation, which, as is usual for work by the scientific service, is referred to as the “state of play”: “Ultimately, it follows from the requirements of the funding law that the funded organizations are not free to decide how to use the funds granted to them, but are bound to the purpose specified in the funding decision. A corresponding state influence on the use of funds is therefore not only possible, but also legally required.”
Find corridor
The FDP MP Philipp Hartewig, sports policy spokesman for his parliamentary group and a member of both the sports and legal committees of the Bundestag, commissioned the report. He says he wants to find the corridor between the threat to the autonomy of sport on the one hand and the requirements of budget law on the other.
“I see,” he concludes, “that the establishment of the agency is possible, but the final say must lie with the budget legislator.” This does not mean that the funding cannot be much more flexible. In his question, Hartewig refers to the Federal Audit Office’s report on “Selected aspects of the reform of elite sports funding” from October 2023.
In it, the federal authority criticizes the fact that the Ministry of the Interior has improperly expanded the role of the DOSB in the agency’s planning; The association is no longer just a representative of the interests of the funded associations and a sports advisor to the ministry, it decides on funding together with the ministry.
Basis for funding decisions
The House of Faeser tried to remedy this shortcoming by assigning nine of the 18 seats on the foundation board to the federal government, five to members of parliament and four to delegates from the ministry in its draft law for the agency set up as a foundation. One of these people should take the chair and will have the right to decide in the event of a tie.
The DOSB, which has six seats on the board of trustees, criticizes this as the federal government’s right to veto. The Sports Advisory Board, which he dominates, is intended only as an advisory body. The Federal Audit Office had suggested that since the administration was reaching its technical limits, the DOSB and associations should define goals and needs on their own.
This can be used as a basis for the ministry’s funding decisions. However, beyond this professional advice, third parties are not allowed to influence the funding decision. The draft bill contains a proposal to extend the state’s influence to the working level.
Michael Reinsch, Berlin Published/Updated: A comment from Michael Reinsch, Berlin Published/Updated: Recommendations: 2 Michael Reinsch, Glasgow Published/Updated: Recommendations: 5
As a foundation under public law, the agency has neither shareholders nor owners, but is the responsibility of the public administration. This would enable her to employ civil servants. This creates a close connection to the public administration while at the same time ensuring independent work. There is horror in sports at the idea that the administration is sitting at the agency’s desk.
