Jan Cameron Resigns

By David

She has gone; her coaching philosophy is discredited and in ruins; a failure. She spent around $10 million and earned nothing; not a single medal at a World LC Championships or Olympic Games. Of course I am pleased to see her go. Not because I have anything against Jan Cameron, the human being. I have only spoken to her twice. On both occasions the conversation barely got passed the, “Hello, it’s cold (or warm) today” stage. No, this was never personal. This was because the philosophy she sold Swimming New Zealand and SPARC was never going to work. Jan Cameron was the architect, but SPARC and Swimming New Zealand gave her the resources and the power. They are as guilty as she is for the human and financial waste that is the legacy of the Cameron years. Miskimmin and Coulter were told. They were told by Swimwatch and they backed Cameron.

On November 26, 2006 the following story appeared in Swimwatch.

In the last few weeks the Florida High School Swimming Championships have been held and Jan Cameron has been appointed to head New Zealand’s high performance swimming effort. Readers outside New Zealand are probably not aware that sport in New Zealand is a social welfare beneficiary equal to any of the state’s unemployed, infirm or uneducated.

In Florida I was invited to an after match dinner paid for by two working families while Cameron pondered how to best employ her career’s advisors, nutritionalists, physiotherapists, masseurs, ear specialists, doctors and orthopedic specialists. I’m sure you get the point. The differences reflect the contrast between a planned socialist attack on world swimming and a high school curriculum option alongside Chemistry and American History. My God, the resources of a nation at her disposal and Cameron can do no better than our local high school; one win. She’s made some pretty big promises about Beijing. I’m beginning to think Florida will beat her there too.

And of course she did lose in Beijing and Florida with Ryan Lochte and Dara Torres did not. Then in December 2006 the following quote appeared in Swimwatch.

The best part of all this is the quote from one of New Zealand’s “elite” swimmers. It is typical of what they are learning in the era of Jan Cameron’s leadership; any excuse will do. “We trained and trained for the Commonwealth Games so we were pretty flat for our next meet.” Your next meet, whoever you are, was the World Championships. What on God’s earth are you doing going to a World Championships, representing a proud little country, feeling “pretty flat”. Why is it only now, when it has cost you money, that you realize the World Championships are pretty important? The fault of course lies in those who lead whoever said this. To Cameron and the bureaucrats in Wellington, is this quote what you have brought the sport of swimming to in New Zealand?

Whoever said this needs to be told, “If you went to a World Championships, feeling pretty flat, not realizing it was an important event and admit that to us now, I’m afraid you do not deserve to be funded, you have not earned that money. And those who taught you all this should resign.”

After battling for five years to have those in power recognize the wantonness of Cameron’s ideology, her passing is most welcome. It has come five years too late – but better late than never. However there is a major concern.

World history has demonstrated many times that when tightly controlled dictatorships end, a power vacuum is created. Chaos and hurt can occur until a sound system of governance takes its place. When tight Communist rule lost control in the USSR, there was a period of near anarchy while the nation’s leaders sought to build a democratic, free market system in its place. We do not want to see the same chaos occur in Swimming New Zealand.

Jan Cameron has ruled over her empire as effectively as any Soviet dictator. She has gone and she has left behind a power vacuum. Good people are on hand to build a free market system of elite swimming in New Zealand. But there is a road block. There are the remnants of the Coulter Board and a CEO, Mike Byrne, who have no idea what we are talking about. For the love of God you guys, get out of the bloody way so those who do know how this sport should work in a democratic, free market environment can get on and put a new structure in place; a structure to replace the old Cameron single party dictatorship.

If Butler and Byrne stay where they are and stubbornly prevent new systems replacing the old, then the chaos, they predict, will occur. Responsibility for that will rest with them. But they will not be hurt. The people who will pay for their obstinacy will be the swimmers who have been cut adrift by Cameron’s departure. We have lobbied for five years to see the end of this woman. She has gone now. We have a responsibility to every swimmer in New Zealand to ensure that a new system of governance fills the vacuum she has left behind. That system will be different, it will be tougher, it will be less comfortable and it will be better. It will be called democratic, free enterprise. It will be New Zealand rugged individualism.

Ross Butler – I know you have no idea what I am talking about. And even if you did, you have voted against the sporting philosophy proposed here for all your time on the Swimming New Zealand Board. The departure of Jan Cameron makes you a road block to progress. For as long as you stay, there is a real danger those who do know the structures that should best replace the dictatorship you and Coulter and Cameron built are not going to have the power to put democratic structures in its place. Please leave now and take your six other Directors with you. There is work to be done.

  • Paul Newnham

    “Domino effect”
    At last it begins.

  • Sensible Swimming

    Like others, I have been calling for this for months, but I take no satisfaction with where we are at. This has never been about the failure of an individual. The reason we are where we are is because of a complete systemic failure.

    There has been a high price paid by generations of swimmers and many many good people have been vilified and will continue to be as the fag ends of the Coulter gang, perhaps better known now as the Butler Boys (I deliberately include Ms Wrightson in that number!) cling to power and try and settle scores.

    Make no mistake we are now facing very challenging times. There is a vacuum which exists because a void, which was forseeable but not planned for, has been created. The Butler Boys have hung their stall out saying they want to fight all the way ‘because where we find ourselves today is the fault of a couple of stirrers and those dastardly regions.’

    Word from within the Butler Boys camp is that the rats are nibbling away at each other while the ship sinks. They will throw each other or anybody else that is in sight under the bus if it will allow their discredited regime to hang on for another day longer. However, Butler, Wrightson, MacDonald and Byrne should never be underestimated. They are in a corner and they will be pushing hard for these two departures to be enough to stop the bloodletting. They will fight dirty. That is their style.

    But, let us not forget this:

    The CEO was identified as being one of the three key areas of failure.

    The GMPP’s failure was as avoidable as it was inevitable. She was failed by incompetent leadership and that leadership is still in place today after her resignation.

    The only plan Butler produced from his much vaunted HP Committee was a plan to get rid of the GMPP and install the CEO as the effective Performance Director. He (the CEO) is reviled by the athletes and is a proven incompetent who knows nothing about swimming and he was the one who allowed this whole mess to happen.

    Lets not forget what successive sets of SNZ accounts tell us about the deal which Cameron and Byrne did with each other. Mike said to Jan “I know nothing about swimming but I need $400k per year to help run my empire. You give me some of the SPARC money, no questions asked, and I will not interfere with what you do in High Performance”. The result is the mess we have today and our swimmers being short changed. Cameron then says to Byrne “Fine. But stay out of HP.”

    They tout the achievements of the Byrne years but forget to say that it is easy to be creative and generous when you are using someone else’s money (in this case SPARC’s money) to support your largesse. Every one of the ‘events’ cited as evidence of success has been the result of spending money which was not theirs to spend. This has been grand larceny on a huge scale. We will not be taken in by your spin Mr Byrne!

    Who allowed this to happen? The SNZ Board who are responsible to ensure that management functions honestly and correctly – that is what governance is about. A SNZ Board member recently said, as quoted to me, “We are not to blame. Coulter, Byrne and Cameron lied to us!” Not good enough – it was your watch and you are responsible. 83% of the Ineson respondents knew it was rotten and that the leadership had failed. It has stunk for so long now that you have all come to accept the fetid and rancid fumes as being normal.

    But while all this was going on, you then decided you would destroy whatever residual trust that may have existed by lying about Project Vanguard. Remember the constant catch-cry at Vanguard meetings up and down the country – “Any one who says that we are trying to get rid of the regions is lying to you”, “We have no predetermined outcome.” Now in your ungracious board letter of 2 September you show your true colours, quoting John Mace from 20 years ago, saying that regions have to go and be replaced by a direct relationship with clubs – right on cue you then roll out the compliant and sycophantic North Shore Swimming as your PR saviours! Sorry guys, that does not work. You are to blame as a collective for this mess. It was never going to be good enough to blame Jan, or Murray, or the regions, or someone else. This was and is a collective failure on your part.

    Time for you all to just get out of the way.

  • Sharon

    Oh how sweet…Now Koru will have two little friends out in the wild.

  • Rhi Jeffrey

    I remember that dinner you mentioned in your 2006 article. I was there!! We went to Opa in Lauderdale and were dancing on the tables all night. SO MUCH FUN!

  • Chris

    Just following the news bulletins.

    I must say, what a glaring contrast in the public exit of Cameron as compared to Coulter. There is no doubt her time has well and truly expired, in fact, probably many years too late. But OMG, her public statements at least have been far more dignified than Coulter, Butler and Co.

    Of course the cynic in me would perhaps leave the possibility open that a part of her severence deal was a gagging order, and who knows what is being said to all and sundry on poolside, I can only guess.

    But even so, I was actually quietly saying to myself “Well done Jan, well done”.

  • Chris

    Another task for you, Swimwatchers.

    Am I the only one who suspects that Ross Butler can’t count? He is saying that Auckland has 11 out of 47 votes. Well according to my calculation and checking the membership numbers on the SNZ website, the following numbers are these:

    Auckland 12
    Bay of Plenty 4
    Canterbury 3
    Counties 2
    Eastern Districts 1
    Hawkes Bay/Poverty Bay 1
    Manawatu 1
    Nelson/Marlborough 1
    Northland 2
    Otago 3
    Southland 3
    Taranaki 3
    Waikato 4
    Wairarapa 1
    Wanganui 1
    Wellington 5

    Subtotal: 47 + NZSTCA 1
    TOTAL: 48

    One region can have no more than a possible 25% of the voting college which means that Auckland should be getting their full 12 votes.

    Does anyone else see it this way? Are SNZ fiddling with the numbers?

  • Hurf Durf

    Across the Ditch: I hear there is a Job in Adelaide.

  • Northern Swimmer

    I share Chris’s sentiment – Kudos to Jan for bowing out in a more graceful and dignified manner.

    We have had nearly 3 months of inertia, and then two ‘resignations’ in the space of two working days.
    Does anyone know who is pulling the strings?
    Has SPARC finally put its foot down and threatened not to provide any more HP funding past September 30 unless there is change in line with the findings of the Ineson report?

    The most recent Listener has a good column by Jane Clifton on Brash’s takeover of Act, and his sense of entitlement to the party leadership. It makes good reading for comparison with the actions of Chairman Butler

  • Chris
  • Tom

    Oh dear, Jan. Why?

  • Northern Swimmer

    Oh Dear.

    I suppose we should consider the “Poorly written, poorly done, rubbish” which was mere “speculation, opinion and unsubstantiated stuff” but was “put there as facts”

    Of the opinions recorded in the Ineson Report:
    – 69% questioned the need for the positions of GM Performance and Pathways and a Head Coach
    – 83% criticised the leadership of SNZ and the HP programme. Many spoke about the failure of leadership at the three critical organisational levels including the GM Performance and Pathways (HP).
    – 91% of those interviewed attributed the poor culture at the HP Centre as a significant barrier to success at London.

    The facts by comparison:
    The best results coming from Cameron’s HP programme – whether you call it NSS, MISH, SNZ ITC, or SNZ HPC
    2006 – Moss Burmester Commonwealth Champion 200m Butterfly
    2007 – Moss Burmester 4th World Championships 200m Butterfly
    2008 – Moss Burmester World Short Course Champion 200m Butterfly
    4th Olympic Games 200m Butterfly
    2009 – Moss Burmester 200m Butterfly, Hayley Palmer 100m Freestyle, Men’s 4 x 100m Medley Relay – all 11th at World Championships

    For this period of four years Burmester gave us our best results. Yet it was him who was the leading voice for the Ineson report being undertaken. If you are to credit the factual results attained, surely the opinions of the same man deserve the similar weight.

    Regarding Chris’s comments on the votes.

    My reading of it is the same as yours. I think someone has misread Rule 16.2 of the SNZ Constitution. I think they have read the rule as no more than 25% of the available regional votes, as opposed to the available total votes. (12 out of 47 would exceed the 25% limit) Auckland should be entitled to 12 votes out of 48.

    I had assumed that Mr Wright had some hand in the recent surge in the number of members accredited to an Auckland club. I was wrong.
    Looking at the numbers
    http://www.swimmingnz.org.nz/uploads/files/Final_Membership_Summary_2010_2011_for_Annual_Report.pdf
    it is King’s Swim Club which has recently added 3554 learn to swim members to give a total of 4165 SNZ members – almost more than the whole of Waikato and BOP combined!
    These are some incredibly impressive numbers. For those unaware of Kings it is the club run by Sam Caradus and Richard Hawke out of the King’s School (not College) six lane 25m pool in Remuera, the home of the former Metro Swim club. The school has only 680 pupils, but the swim club is in the prime catchment area of Auckland’s affluent Eastern suburbs.

    (Please note, in the interest of fair comment I don’t think that Short Course Championships are held in the esteem they deserve. it seems unfair to chastise whichever swimmer it was who did not realise that World Championships were “pretty important”, and yet not fully credit Cameron, Thomas Ansorg and Moss Burmester for winning such a World Championship two years later)

  • Northern Swimmer

    Also, does anyone want to have a wager on how many members SNZ will have by this time next year?
    Currently there are 25181.
    Odds on breaking 100,000?

  • Hurf Durf
  • ex NSS parent

    I was so agreeing with Chris and Norther Swimmer re Jan being gracious and dignified but how things can change in 24 hours.

    I look forward to the day when someone resigns in our lovely country and says “Yep I stuffed up. I take responsibility” rather than blaming it on others, the weather, the exchange rate, their parents, their teachers or how they were misunderstood…..

    That someone will earn my respect.

    Over to you Messrs Byrne and Butler….Yeah Right.

  • Tom

    Thank you Hurf Durf, a fascinating interview. Jan believes the findings of the Inseson report are inept, but believes her legacy to be excellent. How can the Ineson Report be factually incorrect, when (as Northern Swimmer pointed out) Ineson simply asked people what they thought, and they answered honestly? What can’t be factually disputed is her lack of results with the high performance programme.

    I have never met Jan, and I really do wish her all the best, but it would have been better to bow out with grace than pin your failings (goodness knows we all have them) on anyone and everyone.

  • David

    Ausie, you’ll find that Swimwatch wrote a post less than two weeks ago with recommendations for who’d be best to take various positions within Swimming New Zealand.

    There are quite a few commenters on this site who are active in the swimming community and do help, a lot, every day. They don’t use their full names, as much as we wish they would.

    The post in question is here: http://www.swimwatch.net/2011/08/what-about-this-for-an-idea.html

  • Chris

    Hi David

    I was going to comment on the restructuring of High Performance and the proposals, because frankly, things have been deathly quiet on that front. So much for Butler’s regular updates, information, feedback, blah, blah, blah …. And given your commentator Ausie above accusing you and everyone else here of not helping … ah, I will just ignore that comment.

    Nevertheless, I was going to inquire as to how many submissions were made by different parties, because I know that you made one, and I was reading in SwimNews of Moss, and the comments he was making and alluded to about the Swimmers Federation submission:

    http://www.swimnews.com/News/view/8890

    (if you read past the obvious that even Moss is saying it was time for Jan to go).

    But the interesting thing that I picked up, which most would probably miss, is that clearly the Swimmer’s Federation made a submission which says that they don’t want the short-term fix (which is a SPARC speciality I must add), particularly things like a London Campaign Manager. I have to say, they are probably right. If SNZ had of acted on the recommendations of the Ineson Report immediately (which officially was back in June, but apparently the Board knew about it in April) rather than wringing their hands, then there may have been some wisdom in getting a Campaign Manager in place quickly if there was any prospect of making a difference for next year.

    But here we are, September, no closer to any restructuring, our top swimmers in no-man’s land at the moment, and even if they opened up applications, it would be October before any one was appointed, which frankly is too bloody late to make any significant difference. Our swimmers need to have started preparing for London 18 months out from the main event, which means that they are already well and truly in the final countdown.

    I would be very interested in seeing what the Swimmer’s Federation put forward. Rob Nichol is a real heavyweight in sport in this country and comes very well respected (and connected). But I also noticed on the Auckland website that they had a submission as well:

    http://www.akswim.co.nz/site/auckswim/files/Submissions%20-%20Proposed%20staffing%20realignment%20HP%20Unit.pdf

    Fascinating reading as well. But I did pick up that they were advocating due weighting to be given to proposals from the Athletes’ Federation (NZ Swimmers’ Federation) and that Auckland fully supported submissions made by them. So read into that that the Auckland’s submission is along the same lines as the Swimmers’ Federation.

    So there are clearly some with ideas David, yourself included.

    So did any of the other regions make any submissions (Wellington perhaps?), or clubs (NSS perhaps?).

  • David

    Ausie – A new post has just been posted. It should help your condition.