INTERVIEW
“IOF is constrained always by the need to be democratic ...” Sue Harvey gives an interview to Jan Skricka of O-Sport AT the January meeting of the International Orienteering Federation Council, IOF president Sue Harvey announced that she will not be applying to prolong her presidency in the IOF General Assembly this September. This means that the 10-year-long-period of her presidency will come to an end. In this interview, we asked her things that, despite being of significant importance for orienteers around the world, are not frequently mentioned – such as the IOF’s publications, its budget for organisation, PWT / IOF relations, event applications, her vision of the future of our sport, and more.
?
I have a somewhat visionary question to start with: What are your expectations for 2004 in regard to orienteering?
High class World Championships in Foot, Mountain Bike and Trail Orienteering. I am happy to note in this connection that a very successful World Championships in Ski Orienteering has already taken place. New heights of visibility for the sport in the international multi-sport arena through the General Assembly of International Sports Federations (GAISF), whose annual Assembly takes place this year in Lausanne in May. Increased visibility also with sports people generally through coverage of the World Championships.
?
Of course, finance is always a hot topic …but, is it still possible to say what the IOF total annual budget is and what things are financed with it? Does any of the money return directly to orienteering in order to support the sport in its development? IOF’s first job is to provide the structure for the international sport – rules, a programme of events etc. What it can do in addition depends on the funds available. The budget of the IOF is approved by the IOF’s biennial General Assembly. The sources of funding of the IOF are the national federations. Most of the federations want to use their money to develop the sport in their own country, so they have only a minimum to spare to pay fees to the IOF. It should also be borne in mind that it is the national federations that pay the expenses of their representative and experts who work within the IOF. Most of IOF’s budget therefore goes on paying for the Secretariat, a Secretariat which now serves 63 countries with no more staff than when it served just 32 countries two decades ago. IOF does what it can to develop the sport in both member and nonmember countries e.g. with the help of the IOC a clinic was held in South America in 2003. However, much development work is also done by national federations themselves through bilateral action or other programmes, e.g. the Swedish O-Ringen Clinic.
?
I would like to consider the presentation of our sport through official IOF media – such as O-Zine, Orienteering World, and the IOF website at www.orienteering.org . All of these, except for O-Zine, seem to be far behind what is generally considered a standard in the field. I would take the website as an example, 34 THE AUSTRALIAN ORIENTEER SEPTEMBER 2004
Photo: Pirjo Valjanen, Finland
specifically its design, updating, and structuring …things that can definitely be done better, as many orienteering websites have already proven. Or is this just my point of view? IOF’s publications serve an important purpose by providing reliable information to the whole orienteering world. There are plenty of commercial websites and magazine-type websites that thrive on sensation and controversy. This is not IOF’s role. IOF must put a premium on accurate facts in all its publications. IOF has a minimum budget for publications. The federations would hardly view it as good value if their member fees to the IOF were spent on flashy magazines. At the same time, the IOF must provide a shop window to other sports and governments and to organisations like the IOC, so the content of IOF’s magazine, for example, is aimed primarily at the outside world and non-orienteers. Indeed, Orienteering World, IOF’s magazine, is very highly regarded among international sport leaders as a model shop window for the sport.
?
I have another object for consideration: the situation surrounding last year’s JWOC applications, though the same in fact applies to all other applications for organising IOF elite events. JWOC 2004 applications may have needed to have been decided in a hurry; but still, do you think that just announcing the following is enough? "We believe that Poland has the expertise to handle the event even at this short notice. The local club WKS Flota Gdynia has organised several major orienteering events, among them the 1994 edition of the JWOC and the European Youth Orienteering Championships in 2002, says Brian Porteous, Chairman of the IOF Foot Orienteering Commission.” Wouldn’t it more fair to other applicants to announce in what ways the Polish candidature was better than those presented by other countries, and also which other countries had applied? With this and similar things in mind, would you describe the IOF as a transparent organisation? The application procedure for allocation of events takes place according to clear fixed rules, with specific dates for receipt of applications, specific requirements to be fulfilled by the application and a procedure by which applications are evaluated.
