By David

One of the benefits of writing for Swimwatch is the emails. Of course there are the bad and ugly ones that indulge in mild character assassination. We normally publish these. Almost always they classify Swimwatch as swimming porn opened once by mistake when it was delivered to their address in a plain brown envelope.

More interesting are the good emails that inform and add to our understanding. Normally we do not publish these emails. They could compromise the identity of the individuals who wrote them. There are some out there who would regard their content as sedition and could well seek to exact revenge.

We received two emails this week from observers at Project Vanguard meetings held in the same week as the Auckland meeting. It seems that, since the Auckland “coming out” ceremony, Swimming New Zealand’s presentation has had a makeover; actually more like major cosmetic surgery. Their presentation has reinvented itself. Club Centric no longer exists. The new model is PSDM; a vehicle not mentioned in Auckland two days earlier. Don’t know what PSDM means? Well it’s “Professional Services Delivery Model”. Several other changes to Cathy Hemsworth’s presentation are clearly attempts to repair areas of weakness that caused embarrassment and lost credibility in Auckland.

For example there is now a full resume of the Swimming New Zealand Board; a big pre-empt on the competency charge. An abundance of formal qualifications and strategic thinkers means we can confidently buy a used car from them. Further they are saying PSDM will eliminate the “revolving door” of volunteer administrators. That is simply not true. No amount of PSDM will eliminate the need for volunteers. Besides, any implied criticism of volunteers is obnoxious.

In a stunning reversal and in just two days, Swimming New Zealand has moved from having no idea what their new organization will look like to launching an established organizational model with job descriptions that promote career opportunities in the world of PSMD. At the Auckland meeting they had no information on what the new organization would cost. In the same two days, Swimming New Zealand has produced a financial model that assures us that all this will cost not one cent more than is being spent now. What do they say? If it looks too good to be true, it probably is.

Best of all, the new presentation assures us that every region’s identity will be retained. Not every region’s power, just their identity. According to Swimming New Zealand the problem is not that your region is weak. It’s those pesky regions down country that are the problem. It appears Swimming New Zealand think dysfunctional and rural are synonyms. That’s why all we need to do is get behind the greater good; to enter the brave new world of the “Professional Services Delivery Model”. Perhaps we’ll hold off on that used car after all.

Even this week’s negative emails had one positive outcome. They alerted us to shortcomings in the Swimwatch discussion of Project Vanguard. We should explain. The Swimming New Zealand Constitution provides swimming regions with three categories of power; operational, ownership and governance.

Operational refers to the huge volume of swimming related tasks performed by the New Zealand regions. Preparing an annual calendar, organizing swim meets, holding championships, selecting and entering regional teams, maintaining age group and open records, preserving the district’s swimming history, recommending life members, conducting hearings on matters of discipline and so on, are all in this category.

Ownership is similar to operational but refers to the administration tasks associated with managing non-swimming matters; for example banking, minute taking and conducting regular Board Meetings and Annual or Special General Meetings. Most regions have fixed assets that need looking after. In Auckland, for example, care of timing and scoreboard equipment at the West Wave Pool is a significant regional ownership duty.

Governance is completely different. This is the constitutional power awarded to the regions to nominate and elect Swimming New Zealand’s Board; to be the primary members of Swimming New Zealand; to attend and vote at the Swimming New Zealand Annual meeting; to alter the Swimming New Zealand Constitution and to generally exercise oversight of the actions of the Swimming New Zealand Board and its executive. Swimming New Zealand is responsible to its members and, at its most immediate, that’s the regions.

Swimwatch is not a reactionary force of darkness; opposing all change. Generally Swimwatch support and encourage most changes that seek to improve the operational performance of the regions. No one would suggest the administration of swimming in New Zealand has reached a state of nirvana. Shambles like the unfinished database project demonstrate the need for reform in the sport’s operational performance.

Ownership issues tend to be more “legal” in nature and consequently involve more careful reform. However, here too there is scope for the sport to do things better. Good change should be encouraged. If there are better ways for the sport to exercise its ownership responsibilities then they should be welcomed. Certainly Swimwatch would endorse that position.

It is in the specific area of governance that Swimwatch have a problem with Project Vanguard. Swimming New Zealand are using the need for operational and perhaps some ownership reform to overturn the region’s constitutional role in the sport’s governance. SNZ management is improperly linking operational and ownership changes with a push to abolish the region’s governance role. They want out from under the constitutional scrutiny of the regions and are randomly mixing operational and ownership issues in order to achieve their core governance wish. They know most of us support operational reform and will probably let their constitutional change pass in order to get it. That is cynical should not be allowed. The constitutional role of the regions in the governance of swimming is a most important safeguard. It protects the sport from the possibility of a central administration using unfettered powers in ways that are bad for the sport and its members. The regional governance safeguard must be preserved.

Swimwatch support operational reform. However, we are concerned that the present Board and management of Swimming New Zealand want the oversight role of the regions removed. Because they want it removed is reason enough for every region to make sure it stays exactly where it is.