The Targeted Athlete & Coach Manager is going to be critical to the success of swimming in New Zealand. It is important to discuss why. To do that it is necessary to combine political science with some business administration. That will not make for compelling reading but it does explain the structural mistakes that have brought the sport to its knees.

Good governments tend to have characteristics in common.

First they are democratic. There is a responsibility to the membership.

Second, they maintain a clear separation of powers. The functions of administration, legislation and judiciary watch over each other in a cycle of checks and balances.

Third, all three functions are expected to operate according to the rule of law.

Fourth, the freedom of minorities to dissent and the press to critically examine is protected and encouraged.

With these four characteristics in place a society is in good shape to be well governed.

Countries like New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States demonstrate these qualities. Their governments are democratically elected, there is a clear separation of powers between the three branches of government, the rule of law is protected and the freedom of the press and minorities to dissent is safeguarded.

That is very different from a country like Saudi Arabia. The Saudi royal family is not accountable to any democratic choice of the people. The three functions of government are vested in one person, the King. The rule of law is whatever the King at any moment says he wants it to be and the freedom of the press and the population to dissent is non-existent.

So how is this relevant to Swimming New Zealand? Well prior to 2012 Swimming New Zealand did display most of qualities characteristic of good government. The Board was accountable to the membership in annual democratic elections. There was a clear separation of powers between the clubs and coaches who exercised the executive function of nurturing New Zealand’s swimmers and the Swimming New Zealand legislature who set the framework of rules. The judicial function was subject to too much control by the legislature, but appeal to the Sport’s Tribunal was separate and available.

Prior to 2012 Swimming New Zealand also observed the rule of law. Of course open and genuine annual elections and an independent executive (that’s the clubs and coaches) went a long way to making sure the rule of law was protected. And prior to 2012 Swimming New Zealand was less inclined to control public discussion. Now the Code of Conduct and the Athlete’s Contract demand obedience to the corporate line.

So what happened in 2012 that changed Swimming New Zealand’s government from a reasonably democratic organization into something more akin to the Saudi model? Well in 2012 Sport New Zealand forced Swimming New Zealand to accept a new constitution written by a Sport New Zealand minion called Chris Moller. What was the result?

Well democracy was shredded. The constitution introduced a series of what were effectively Sport New Zealand Board appointments. The organisation was controlled by the Sport New Zealand royal family. Board members no longer relied on the Swimming New Zealand membership for their power. As long as Miskimmin was happy, Bruce Cotterill kept his job.

But the worst change brought about by the 2012 Constitution was the abolition of the separation of powers. The legislature (that’s Swimming New Zealand) got directly involved in administration. They took over the function that had previously been managed and controlled by the clubs and coaches. They had their own swim team that they promoted and financed ahead of everything else. The effect of that was catastrophic. The standard of club activity and the performance of New Zealand coaches was savagely reduced. Regional coaches knew they were rated second best and acted accordingly. But most damaging of all, there was nothing and no one to control the excesses of Swimming New Zealand. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. And it did.

The effect of centralised power can be seen in many ways. Because the executive and legislative functions are now controlled by the same people, you end up with fiascos like the recent Commonwealth Games’ team selection. Before 2012 Swimming New Zealand selected teams prepared by the club coaches. The selectors were very separate from those responsible for training the swimmers. Because of centralization Swimming New Zealand is effectively picking its own team. A poor team selection or a team of only two swimmers reflects directly on the performance of those doing the selecting. Swimming New Zealand cannot be expected to act properly when it is called upon to pass judgement on itself. That is not good government. Why? Because there is no separation of powers, no checks and balances.

And because there is no separation of powers, there is no rule of law. The organisation can select who it wants for what it wants and there is no means of redress. That is Swimming New Zealand today; a sham democracy with no separation of powers and no rule of law.

But what can the new Targeted Athlete & Coach Manager do about that problem. Well his primary goal should be to reform the system of government. He will not be able to do anything about reintroducing democratic elections. What he can do though is re-establish the separation of powers and the rule of law. He can strip Swimming New Zealand of any involvement in preparing swimmers. For the good of swimmers and swimming he needs to insist that the legislators (that’s Steve Johns and Bruce Cotterill et al) are kept well away from preparing swimmers. They do not know anything about it and it is not their function. Recent history tells us they are no good at it either. The executive function (that’s the clubs and coaches) will prosper if it is independent. Preparing swimmers must be transferred fully back to the executive, clubs and coaches. After the years of neglect the Targeted Athlete & Coach Manager can then begin to strengthen the role of clubs and coaches and improve their performance. And he can take upon himself the judicial function of ensuring the separation of powers is safeguarded and the rule of law is protected.

Those are the core policy goals of the new position. Without proper governance anything else the Targeted Athlete & Coach Manager tries to do will founder in exactly the same way as everything else has done in swimming recently. Assisting a promising swimmer from Dunedin or Napier or Taupo is only going to be effective when the environment in which they operate is properly governed. And rule by a Sport New Zealand monarchy such as Swimming New Zealand has right now is not good governance.

A Targeted Athlete & Coach Manager can change that. The Targeted Athlete & Coach Manager must change that.

PS – I read a social media comment recently that we need to be told which athletes the Targeted Athlete & Coach Manager is going to help. That comment fails to understand the importance of the position. There are much more important issues for the Targeted Athlete & Coach Manager to address before we get to individual athletes and clubs assistance.