 Yn ymddangos, dyna'r ffordd gynllunol. Mae'r gweithio yw dr Jay Simon Rhoaff. Mae'n ystod yn fyddeithasol i gael i chi wedi'u cyffredinol, i gael ei ddechrau, rym ni'n dod yn ymwyfyr a'r cyffredinol, yw i'r cyffredinol, yn cyffredinol i'r Governant. Rwy'n mynd i'r cyffredinol, i gael i gael i'r cyffredinol, i'w vair i'r Gweithrein, yw yw'r cyffredinol, o'r ffordd yn ddod o'r ffordd yn oed o'r ffordd gyda'r eu gyfnodau yma i gyfnodol, a dwi'n gweithio eu cyffordd o'r ffordd. Mae'r ddechrau'r rhan o'r bobl o'r cyffordd gyda'r CMSRC yma i gydag'r ffordd yn ei ffordd a'r gweld. Pryddyma'r yma yn ei bwysig o'r gweld sy'n bwysig o'r bwysig o'r bwysig. Mae'r bydd ymddai'r cyffordd wedi bod yn cael perffesion o'r gweithio'r bwysig o'r rhan o'r rhan o'r bwysig, We are waiting to see what that might mean and really we want to think about some of the broad issues that the sport and diplomacy program discussion discourse whichever academic adjective you want to use. Is being undertaken over the last four, five, six years now. Na'n rhiwyd ychydig arweithio y lliff tîm Ysgoledig ac flwyddwr ar y lliffiau. A rwy'n cael ei wneud ei holl. A wnaethi oo i gweld y trofannuWWF i fod yn gwych i gefnogi'r mewn dymenol. Yna, rydyn ni'n gydag eu chyflogi'r ddweud yr oes o'r ddechrau a'r dweud i bobl yn yr hyn yn dweud. ac yn ddigonwch eich bod yn gweithio'r ffordd o'i ddigonwch i'ch gwaith. Rydych chi'n mynd i ddweud y ddweud yw'r ddweud, y gwaith yw'r parfu'n gyffredinol yn drafod. Rwyf wedi ddigonwch bod fod yn ei ddweud, ond mae ydych chi'n mynd i'w hynny, ac mae gael y gallwn ffaint i'r ysbyt yw, sef yr ydych chi'n gwneud, mae gennymio'r ysbyt, mae gael y gallwn gwneud i'r ysbyt yw'r hi'r ysbyt yw'r hynny. Felly, gallwn gwheilio'r gwahanol i ddim yn cywladmiogthaf, ac ei wneud fyddai eu cyd Rhysgwyr Llywodraethol, ond i'r wneud yn sírwylliannol i'r Gael. Fe wnaeth tawd ynddo i ddim yn rhoi'r gwahanol i gafodd o'r gwybod oherwydd y ffysigol yn ei fod bwysig ar y ffordd Aelod. Felly, fy modd i ddim yn ddigonol o'r morddorol yma, maen nhw'n ddod o'r lle hi'n fiy oed o gweithlio'r gwahanol. yw'r gweithio sydd wedi'i chweithio ar gyfer y cyfnod o'r cyfrindiau o'r hynny o'r wneud neu sy'n dwi'n ddim yn mynd i'w rwyf. Byddwn ni'n fwy o'r fawr o'r cyfnod o'r cyfrindiau yma, ac iddyn nhw'n ddwych i'w ziwyddiadau i bobl. Felly, rydyn ni'n fwy o'r cyfrindiau i'w cwmwy. Yn amlwg, rydyn ni'n gweithio i'r cyfrindiau i Siatwyf, rydyn ni'n gweithio i Siatwy. Hwyl unig i'w wych. Rwy'r gwahanol iddyn nhw, i weld yma yn wentyn i fynd, ond yma hwn i'w wneud i gael y rhaglen i wneud. Barathe yn ystod, bynydych chi nhw'n gwybod y worshi'r amser wedi'i ei wneud eu bwysig i ddechrau ein bod nhw'n losu. Rwy'n mewn yma, mae'n ddych chi'n gweithio'r cysylltu'r 3 ll ei wneud a gweithio'n ddiwbdyll yn y pethau i ddiddordeb. Rwy'n cael ei ddod gan 7 a 8. oedd y gallwn, gydym yn oed yn meddwl i'r digonfawr, pe fydd 12, 15 o 16 oed ac gwahoddwch i'n meddwl i'w rheidio'r gweld gweld yn lle, yn digonfawr, oherwydd, yw'r cyfryd, gyda Simon fel hynny, os ydych yn cael ei fyddeithas i'r llan gyda phwy o'r fastingodd blwyddyn i willafolol. Y cwestiwn y cei gyda ni'n dod i'r própriau yma, rydyn ni'n gwneud oes hallu Siamond yna yn dda'r cyfrwyr. So, if I do talk quickly and incinherently, it's not because of my Scottish accent, it's because of the one bottle of bex that I've had. I want to talk about thinking about the mainstream of what we're looking to do, sport, diplomacy and governance. My own research has been on the Commonwealth Games and the Commonwealth Games movement, and I guess how, as we do pivot towards a post-Brexit era, how the Commonwealth Games and the Commonwealth is a geopolitical entity might be an avenue which we might pursue as a way of securing diplomacy and power for the UK in the future climate. But also to consider why that might be a very bad idea as well for numerous different reasons, which colleagues touched upon earlier on today during our round-table discussions, but I'll try and recapture this evening as well. Simon asked me to do any introductions, but I said to have a slide on some blatant self-indulgence, and I literally do. I want to talk about this to give you a sense of how possibly my work in the games might feed into some of those elements there. I completed not too long ago a PhD on the Glasgow 2014 Commonwealth Games, but particularly how that was linked to the political symbolism of that moment in time in Scotland where it was literally weeks before the independence referendum and how an event, a pre-existing event could be used for political means. Someone mentioned that on today during the round-table about the SNP thought of this about the games, but they actually got by luck, it was Labour who bid for the games in 2007 with a political system designed in Scotland to never let there be a nationalist majority which failed. It then gave an opportunity for the SNP to potentially use that games for political ends. When that happened, many moons aligned for me in terms of PhD thesis, an interest in sport, but nationalism, politics, and particularly secessionist and nationalist politics as well. What I did is I looked at the political discourse, but interestingly, I talked to politicians themselves about what they were saying, about the games and what that meant. That was the most fascinating thing for me was actually talking to the people saying these statements and asking, did you really believe what you're saying about these elements there as well? Thinking about diplomacy, what this game has meant about Scotland and Scotland's unique status within the UK and what that meant as a platform for Scotland to almost act as a pre-nation state actor on the global stage as well. I'll touch upon that a little bit later on. Then I've got some stuff today about the Commonwealth Games movement more broadly and how diplomacy and governments and the real politic of the Commonwealth fed together, which I'll touch upon briefly. The third one down under the publications is one which I think is relevant, a collaboration with a colleague at Jack Black at Sheffield Hallam which looked at the media and the symbolism of the 2014 Games and how that was represented on different sides of the political agenda and what that meant, particularly reflections about what the Commonwealth and the Empire meant and on the more rightly in newspapers how the Empire was looked at through rose-tinted spectacles, whereas on the left a little bit more self-awareness about the fact that the Empire was not something to be celebrated, was not something to be proud of and again that feeds forward into possibly the possibilities of using the games for diplomacy in the future. Also looking at how Scottish politicians in the working group for Scottish sport thought that sport might be, for an independent Scotland, a tool to be leveraged to give Scotland some status in the broader world. I've currently moved forward looking at the 2018 Games with a colleague from Southampton, looking at how that has been framed within promotion on political narratives and looking at also the case of Catalonia and how sport plays a role there in terms of nationalist politics, diplomacy and things along those lines. So, in many ways, when this event and this invite came along and very often asked me to pull some ideas together on it, a lot of my past stuff, whilst I've not framed it explicitly within a discussion of diplomacy governance, has been resonated with a lot of those ideas in different ways. In the Commonwealth Games I used the free second order mechanism in the title today and I draw upon David Black's work there where he says that we compare it to the mega events, the world cups and the Olympics of this world. The Commonwealth Games is only limited in its impact and we have colleagues from outside of the Commonwealth who when I explain what my PhD was on they would say the Commonwealth what and you would have to give a little bit of contextual explanation of what that meant and it is a second order event but that means it's available to different nations, different regions for different purposes as well. But it has its own unique politics and its own unique political movement and what we see if we kind of look at the sweep of time is I guess a de-empiring of the Commonwealth Games and its symbolism moving away from this idea of it being the British Empire Games towards the Commonwealth and I think we can all sense the kind of softening of that phrase from empire to Commonwealth and that does reflect the kind of political relationships between the member states and the member nations of the Commonwealth but is that again something symbolic rather than something honest and reflective in terms of that move there. The games have been used for diplomatic means in the past and the best example is the apartheid regime in South Africa and how the games was used by various different actors to leverage and to impact upon the nature of the South African state. So where that be barren South Africa from the Games Federation, the Glynigals agreement which actually about six or seven years later was used to make sure the games could continue as a movement because of the threaded boycotts at that time and effectively why those boycotts did come to fruition in the 1996 games in my hometown of Edinburgh where we did have a boycott, an actual boycott from some Caribbean, Asian and African nations which left the games looking somewhat sparse and somewhat white would be fair to say if you actually looked at what actually happened in terms of how the games looked to the outsider. Since that time and I refuse to use a particular phrase which talks about, which has been used a lot to talk about how games and events have been used but I'll use the phrase image promotion and future event springboarding to kind of say that moving away from this kind of traditional sense of diplomacy and actually pressurising nations to change their rules we're kind of moving towards in the games as we have with the Olympics and other mega sporting events a shift towards using it as an image projection, promotion and looking towards something bigger and I think an element of that came into the 2014 games but where on that was something about Scotland or something about Glasgow that we'll try and touch upon briefly in a second but again we've seen the games being used for that Kuala Lumpur, a perfect example, Deli 2010 a shift away from the white dominions in terms of hosting which has traditionally been the case apart from Kuala Lumpur, Deli and the Kingston games but what we're seeing now particularly with the stripping of the 22 games from Durbin and it being returned or redistributed to Birmingham we've seen a recurring dominance of the white dominions we've seen that in the last few games the games has gone from being something which is about the entire Commonwealth if you look at the hosting patterns it is the white dominion nations which dominate it in terms of hosting but also more broadly in terms of the medals and the events which are within there and I question whether or not with this grand scoop of time we might have seen symbolic gestures about moving away from the UK and the white dominions to the rest of the Commonwealth in terms of distribution and more tokenism rather than in terms of reality so moving on to Glasgow 2014 and my own trusted in that there as well talking to politicians but also most of the academic reflections on that came up with five main kind of real goals and I think the first three really linked to this idea of diplomacy and governance and I'll touch on the governance thing now that this was Scotland's games but also Glasgow's games and there's a lot of tune and throne about who took the credit for it was it the UK government? I think most people would say probably not was it the Scottish government led by the SNP but in Glasgow a Labour-led council government who really were the ones who maybe put their necks to the ground stone and really pushing things forward in the Glasgow area so there's some tensions there about that but in many ways it kind of shows the SNP's approach to regeneration using sport as a way of driving things forward and particularly in the east end of Glasgow a fairly deprived area as well but in terms of diplomacy what they did almost try and do as well is doob of image projection and tourism promotion Glasgow for those who don't know Glasgow very well it's got a bit of a bad reputation in terms of its city the main streets of Glasgow is the way it's often kind of thought of and a lot of the idea behind it was to change that the idea about what Glasgow was as an events destination and they've had a number of sporting events as part of their kind of economic regeneration of Glasgow and a kind of de-industrial era there as well but the SNP government also wanted to use it as a way of kind of diplomatically presenting themselves almost as a nation in waiting as well we are ready in this kind of pre-referendum era to be ready to be a global actor to be able to be on the same path the same platform as the rest of the Commonwealth Nations we had the usual rhetoric and legacy of our sport in a sporting participation boost this kind of trickle-down economics or trickle-down expectation that elite-level sport will lead to tackling the health disparities in Glasgow again the usual rhetoric and nonsense we've spirited about that and four years down the line we know that's absolutely a total fallacy but I won't talk about that today because I only have a lot of time but this is what they talked about forgive me for this but I want to share my misery with you I spent a lot of time going through speech transcripts press releases and all the rest of it to see the kind of narratives and the merits of what was being said at the top the main thing they talked about there's going to be a sporting legacy and this is the SNP's spin on what the game has meant we're going to have this sporting legacy and that sporting legacy economics not far behind though and really for me if you talk about the benefit of an event if you just talk with the economics elements of it I'll give you that I will say yes there is an economic boost there is some return pound for pound in what you spent sporting I disagree with but third down in the dark blue a major thing was about Scotland's profile reputation showcasing Glasgow and Scotland in that order Glasgow first, Scotland after and that was quite important to share the credit but international relations and diplomacy was often a key element there as well talking about how it allowed Scotland to build diplomatic links with their commonwealth brothers and sisters and friends in the friendly games particularly a lot of emphasis on Malawi Scotland is a formal diplomatic relationship and an aid relationship with Malawi and that was also one was emphasised quite a lot there as well again going back to some of Simon's comments earlier on about state actors in diplomacy Scotland almost trying to act as a state in waiting and act diplomatically in that kind of way moving on to the go coast I'm conscious of time so I'm going to kind of finish up on this slide before opening to some questions and some thoughts we see something different in Australia similar in the sense of governance in that you've got this tension between in Scotland the devolved government of Scotland and the UK state government in Australia you have the federal government and in the state government and we have the same tension of Queensland wanting to claim credit for the games versus the Australian federal government wanting to claim credit and again contrasting political parties a Labour-led government in Queensland versus a Liberal-led Liberal-national-led government coming from Canberra and again we kind of see some of those elements coming to play there as well this is being used to boost a particular area if anyone's had the pleasure of travelling down at the east coast of Australia to Suffer's Paradise it was a stop-off on your way to somewhere better yes it was a fantastic place a beautiful place but it seemed like a little bit of Americana on this kind of beautiful part and then you went down to Sydney or you moved from Brisbane to somewhere else and they want to make people stick not just as tourism but as investment and all the rest there as well so again we're kind of seeing the games being again framed in that way Birmingham 2022 we see exactly the same rhetoric coming about Birmingham 2022 and what that's going to do to Birmingham but the West Midlands area more broadly as well and the straff line where anything is possible optimism and positive energy of the Gold Coast you can kind of get away with that a little bit more in Australia, you can in Glasgow in terms of optimism and energy Glasgow regions are actually to be fair I'm from Edinburgh they're a lot more positive and optimistic than we are but with the sunshine and all the rest you can get those elements there as well but this was a little detail there on during today as well but we kind of see this kind of pivot in Australia diplomatically they're not looking at the UK they're not thinking about us they're thinking about China I was informed by Claire they're looking at India they're looking at America they're looking at the Pacific and Asian countries they're not looking to really build strong trade relationships with the UK yes they will want them but really are we the big fish and as we then think about going forward in the Commonwealth Games and our status is UK within there do we over egg our status within the Commonwealth and our status internationally there as well on Birmingham 2022 and I'll leave on this point because I'm conscious I am rambling Birmingham 2022 the West Midlands mayor committee said this will be an opportunity to show what post Brexit Britain is all about and for me who leans towards the remain side of things that's not necessarily a good thought about what four years will look like but there's been this pivot away from a major trading partner in political eyeliner in the EU going back to embrace the Commonwealth and I just can't see the Commonwealth want to embrace us back in the same way I don't think that we have been a good leader of that organisation historically I don't think we've done always good things for those nations will they want to embrace us in the way they want us to embrace that's a question which is open and I think as you look towards Birmingham 2022 those will be some of the key arguments being had and the key trading discussions and Gavin touched upon it earlier on about what the trade relationships might be coming from the transition from Gold Coast 2018 to Birmingham 2022 and the UK will be very keen to do that but will we be banging our head against a brick wall? I'm not sure time will tell so I'll leave it on that kind of that open-ended non-judgmental statement in many ways and ask if there's any questions thank you take off questions at the end excellent, Grant, thank you so thank you beer yes, no I don't want to do that thank you very much and now I'm going to ask my colleague Jay to speak so I shall put his slides up there yes, over to you no need for a grand introduction thank you very much, yeah yeah I'm a Liverpool fan so if you're a Everton fan please you'll pay with me well, thanks for having me well, what I was having a lovely trekking in Y Semity National Park their last weekend as I was out of the internet and then when I got the first email in the civilized word I got this email from Verity and saying, I'm giving a talk as a keynote speaker along with Cioto I had to say that Simon will give a talk and I will chair that was an original idea so if you found that my talk is a little bit sloppy please blame Simon his email address is SM or something like that but I will try to fill up and then so you can see a little bit my talk as a footnote as well as a slightly different approach to the mega events from the perspective of media studies and sociology of culture I'm currently working on the assessment of the legacy of the Pyeongchang Olympics commissioned by the South Korean government especially focusing on the cultural program as well so I'd like to give you what actually happened during the Pyeongchang Olympics in February and how this is actually doing the follow-up in terms of the inter-Korean dialogue and especially nurse and US summit ahead so I'd like to say a little bit in terms of the Pyeongchang Olympics with reference to the spectacle of sporting mega events which Cioto actually wrote in detail so this morning when I was at World Cup again there's a breaking news the CIA director Michael Pompeo actually made a secret trip to North Korea and then it had actually heist to talk with the North Korean leader maybe Kim Jong-un it's really flurry of the fast diplomacy the communications and affairs that are taking place but if it's not the first time actually the North Koreans the United States tried to make some kind of bridge and inter-communication between two parties in 1994 the former president is Jimmy Carter actually made the first visit to Pyeongyang and met the then leader and the founder of North Korea Kim Il-sung and then in 2000 then Secretary of States Obright has made a trip to Pyeongyang to actually ease the tension about this bombing on Pyeongyang by the Clinton administration and actually the big discussion went very well and then they were planning to make a deal about changing this ceasefire treaty truth into the peace agreement so that's the big deal for not just about the denuclearizing North Korea but actually normalizing North Korea and then bring it into the international communication of international network and in 2009 also former president Bill Clinton visited Pyeongyang and then tried to to make a better progress the relationship between two countries but when in 2000 after Obright visited Pyeongyang George Bush was elected so hold those discussions stopped and then following these Bush administrations and even Obama administration the relationship between North Korea and United States didn't work very well the point I would like to make is why North Korea wanted to actually participate is Pyeongyang Olympics they need to have a conversation with the United States what's this kind of context one thing is that North Korea desperately need to change the situation especially these peace treaties so we need to a little bit focus on that what's the impact of the Pyeongyang Olympics on this whole change suddenly we didn't actually expect this massive and the sudden change if you look back this last year and there is when hold this nuclear the test took place especially in the continental ballistic missile the test took place few times in 2017 and then UN sanctions actually was implemented again and you may remember very well clearly Donald Trump said his militant solutions are now fully in place it was the August last year and followed by October and then they are warming up before this and then calling there is Kim Jong-un there is a local man they are really trying to do the verbal war and warming up so it was very as a Korean what is going on are they really serious and what they are talking about in terms of diplomacy here when you talk about the security between two countries this kind of amagaton atmosphere that was just a few months ago and hold the western media were really keen to find out what's going on between two countries but suddenly in February North Korea made a phone call to South Korea in the demilitarized zone for the first time after eight years and then they sent the sister of the Kim Jong-un and then the whole started the recollection between South and North Koreans and the discussions resumed in February and as you can remember they made march together between North and South Koreans and they modified the symbolic flag and then showing the word that they are actually trying to make a progress the Pyongchol Olympics there is a lot of criticism about the economic and political impact but in terms of this whole political and diplomatic the rewards it was absolutely worth for those whole issues and as you can see they directly made an effort to show the word this North and South Korea working together and collaborating to ease the tension in the peninsula and then these are the last penultimate torch bearer to hockey players from North and South Korea and they made a joint team for female ice hockey teams and then they lost all games but they scored once so that was a brilliant moment we didn't expect this to win any games but it's just one goal so they did it and it's a paralympic on the other hand they marched separately and saw some other reasons we can come back to that so as you can see in the opening ceremony the actual the chairman of the North Korean Republic and the sister of Kim Jong-un who is actually delivering the letter to President Moon from Kim Jong-un and well the the vice-president's pants was actually completely ignoring this North Korea together with Abe so you can see this is the tensions between North Korea and other countries like the United States in Japan are very evident still in the opening ceremony so you can see there is a very conflictual relationship between South and North Korea and the Japan and United States are more complicated than we can now think about in terms of six-party talks around those nuclear weapons issues after this is the closing ceremony and the United States send Mrs. Ivanka Trump maybe got some idea they should send a little bit better diplomatic figure than pants because who represents the more hoax and there is a hard line on dealing with the nuclear issue in North Korea on the other hand North Korea send a military figure to the South Korea saying well we send the first time and it's more sub to power now we have also hard power too this is actually quite this is the mayor of the Beijing who will host the Beijing 2022 so it shows some kind of the very complicated but straightforward message to the world from North Korea we are ready to have a talk but also we are not quite willing to give up hold the military power yet so it shows this a while this diplomatic war between North Korea and United States actually during the Pyongchang Olympics probably North Korea scored a little bit more than the United States but besides the sports diplomacy there have been a lot of the cultural exchange between South Korea and North Korea during and after the Pyongchang Olympics so North Korea and cultural delegation visited South Korea for the first time since early 2000 and they made the whole performances together during the performance again there is the sister of Kim Jong-un I had quite a show and then displayed very friendly communication with the President Moon and South Korea symbolically it displayed a lot of progress and the developed relations between two countries in return South Korea sends their cultural delegation to North Korea early April and then it was in Pyongyang not Pyongchang Pyongyang the concert hall and then was the popular and shocking and since it was one of the K-pop girl group Red Velvet which is one of my favorite groups as well actually this was such a absolutely brilliant, brilliant performances but it's a little bit toned down a little bit more it's tailor made the North Korean style the performance you run not as usual K-pop girl group performances which I'm a little bit disappointed with because if we push a little bit to what extent we can go further but it's wearing the black so as you can imagine Kim Jong-un went to the performances and then afterward had a chat with the whole big K-pop stars and then had a big photo opportunities so suddenly former true administration of South Korea over the last eight, nine years there were absolutely no significant communications between North and South and now two presidents of South Korea are in jail I'm embarrassed now I'm very proud actually to send them to the prison but suddenly there's a whole liberalization of South Korea also actually opened the door to North Korea so that's another inter-Korean political context along with international political context so these two former presidents of the Kim Dae-Jung Novelary and there is a presidential role Kim Dae-Jung first made a visit to Pyongyang in 2000 and under those features of the sunshine policies to invite North Korea into the global order and then how they can actually ease the tension and they actually talk very well but then the following the president's role also made another step forward to visit North Korea and then they made a certain mutual agreement about easing this tension especially military tensions around this the demilitarized zone and as you can see over the last 10 years there was no actual noticeable and significant communications between two and then next week 27th of April these two will meet in the militarized zone for the first time after and 2017 so the one of key agenda most important agenda they are now setting out is how they can actually make sure there is a ceasefire treaty introduced into the peace treaties and how it can be carried out into the next big summit between North Korea and United States because the actual stakeholder is between North Korea and United States not between North and South Korea about this ceasefire truth so it should be conducted by North Korea and United States so South Korea actually serving and playing a role as a mediator desperately and then trying to turn it around well the role of this purchase during this the Pyeongchang Olympics can be cynically represented by the western media in terms of there's more manipulated there's untruthful trusty word in North Korea strategies or we can say they are really trying to make a difference between two countries the relationship maybe is normalizing to South Korea but I will leave it to those whole more details to you experts well so it was March 9 a few weeks ago North Korea leader Kim Jong-un and US President Donald Trump made a sudden announcement their actual meeting probably in June or earlier according to the Donald Trump today so those whole process surrounding Pyeongchang Olympics evidently displayed and showed that actually these mega events whether it's the media spectacle or political spectacle made a massive contribution to turning around these tensions between North Korea and other countries especially South Korea and United States so I'd like to say what could be done is the context of the mega events in East Asia so that's the last part I'd like to say a few words well mega events in East Asia is always kind of the big emblem of the modernization how they can actually expedite the modernization by taking a big risk of the policies and implementing the new economic directions and political democratizations and so on and so on but you can see it as a token in 1960 actually Japan was awarded to host one in the 1940s which was cancelled over the second world war and then Seoul Olympic took place in 1988 Beijing 2008 so it shows it's an Asian modernization through mega events especially sports mega events of the Olympics and that World Cup was hosted by Korea Japan which also facilitated a big mutual understanding between two very hostile relationship as Japan is a former colonizer and Korea as colonies this is how they actually make this progress through World Cup as a big issues at the time the suitors briefly mentioned about the mega events maybe we can say that the mega event in terms of the three big events such as the FIFA World Cup and IOC run Olympics but also the world exhibition could be the very traditional big mega event as well but as the mega events increasingly becomes more media events it's a mega the industrial expert which used to be a big the symbol of the technology and progress became a little bit marginalized and their impact on the global society is increasingly smaller and smaller but in the 70s and 80s Osaka also the technology and industrial society and so Korea also hosted one the Shanghai 2010 also showed the completion of Chinese way of the modernization in terms of the mega events so maybe Xi Jinping is a big fan of the football so he is willing to very much so to host probably 20 26 will be done so 2030 I guess that's the Chinese beat coming back to Asia in terms of the smaller scale of the winter games Japan hosted twice and Pyeongchang and then Beijing 2022 so this is the second round of the eastern Asian modernity in terms of the mega events Tokyo Seoul, Beijing are done and then the Pyeongchang 2018 through Tokyo 2020 to 2022 Beijing this is the second stage of their modernity so another question raised concerns why this destination such as Japan as the most industrial advanced countries needs another mega events at this stage because it's a quite similar region to London 2012 as the reorganization and rehabilitation of the urban areas such as the east London here but Tokyo also needs to not gentrification but it needs to rehabilitate the east Tokyo area but also politically they need to change their image since Fukushima nuclear disaster and then that's how it can be related Japanese administration their hope to actually change their national security role into the more normal state role so that's a little bit the eastern Asian context of mega events maybe I should a little bit finish up now well I've been working on this South Korean context of mega events but as I said in terms of the spectacle it's a little bit look into the very specific and particular context of mega events rather than generalizing and characterizing them in terms of the more overall general features so I've been working on analyzing South Olympics in terms of the spectacle it's more like focusing on their political democratization in 1980s and after the long period of military dictator ships in South Korea they tried to show off the word as the part of developing countries and democratically stable countries into the world and then in 2002 world cup a little bit different spectacle was more manipulated and distributed in terms of more post-industrial high-tech society and how this more consumer culture actually is more articulated and developed through these mega events so then Pyongchang Olympics is a slightly smaller scale but I would like to see this as I earlier mentioned it's more geopolitical issues and combined by their the more high-tech digital culture the articulated spectacle of the Pyongchang Olympics well it's kind of the eastern Asian context in terms of collective unities and to articulate and then show this national identity you can very easily pick up as well so let me just repeat how we can analyze those media spectacly more systematic ways so we applied the idea of the Olympic Games impact factors presented by the IOC in 2006 and then this kind of tri-partite indexes as well social culture and economic dimensions so I'm particularly working on this more cultural program during the Olympics and after the Olympics in terms of the legacies let me just finish it it's not only just at North South United States relationship in terms of diplomacy but I was very much struck and by all those athletes very mature and very peaceful gesture about the competition and the victories after the final round of the 5,000 won speed skating and then South Korean actually is a big name actually failed to win third gold in a road she actually won the silver and the Japanese skater who always lost to her over the last 10 years won it at the end but actually rather than showing off of her excitement she actually conserved at the heart and the cold as her arch-rivers which showed the South and South Korean and Japanese relationships are also getting into the very different states as well so it's not only political and the state level of communication through mega events but from below the sportsmen and athletes but also the civil engagement and then society civil society is very much involved in this whole mega events the communication and as well so that's the point that I'd like to say okay then I have the best, thank you very much convener panel discussion so if I can invite Samson and Charlie there to come along too gentlemen, have a seat I'm sure there's much there that is as interested to you as it was to me so Jamie here we've been joined on the panel by two of my say my that's very possessive two of Sir Axe's sports diplomacy students from the last session I'll just give them a moment to introduce himself Sir Good evening everyone my name is Shweta I'm from India and I moved into the UK last year to do my masters in international studies and diplomacy and I've been learning a lot about sporting events and I can't wait for this discussion to start, thank you so much The same degree program as Shweta in international studies and diplomacy was on Simon and Verity's sport diplomacy course this year which has been really interesting and fascinating Thank you very much for introducing yourself so I asked him to provide some questions and reflections on Stu and Jay's presentations to get the ball rolling so ladies over to you while you're busy just dating and thinking of questions of your own Thanks to you, to me, to you Thank you very much for your thoughts It's a very different perspective both of them on how different but related on how sporting events can be a platform for the discussion of wider issues so my notes from Stu's talk about the Commonwealth he noted down he used the phrase the de-empiring of the Commonwealth Games so moving from the Empire Games now that's a softening of the phrase but is it really a softening of the whole notion of the Empire really and I just get a question to ask later whether you think that's going to become the Commonwealth Games or the Commonwealth you think that's going to become defunct in the future if it's the lasting relic of the Commonwealth is the Commonwealth Games is that ever going to continue do you think that's working it almost was for a long period of time I think the Games was all that was left of of the Commonwealth and I guess symbolically and internationally and whether or not that will change going forward will depend upon how much the Commonwealth I think are ready to embrace their old imperial masters is normally that's what the Commonwealth meant I think in order to do that I think the UK and Great Britain needs to really reflect upon that role and not just symbolically but honestly and be ready to trade as equals and actually in many ways maybe think about re-parrying some of the things that haven't happened in the past and we've talked today about whether or not that would happen and I'm doubtful at will so possibly it would just be the Games our symbolic gesture and I use the phrase second order mechanism earlier on to talk with the Games but also I think the Commonwealth is maybe a second order organisation and that could drop off the radar so I don't know but my fear is unless we change our tack the Games would be the only thing for that Before I ask my question I personally learnt a lot from these two presentations especially about the unification of the two Koreas and my question to Mr Ajejo is do you think sport will dominate over international relations in the near future or will it be the other way around? I hope so before the Pyeongchang Olympic this is the area where the attempt to form the unified teams and the Sydney Olympics they marched together in 1990 they also played the ping-pong as a unified team and they won the gold against China, mighty China so I think we've boosted the national pride and optimistic the emotional response to the whole sports spectacle and sports definitely serve as a source of power and as a cultural power too so I hope it is that the sport can actually contribute to these very harsh political issues because another danger is that the sport is also very emotionally an effective communication therefore sometimes it can be utilised for some other reasons as well so maybe we need to see both parts of the sport as the cultural power Thank you so thank you for your thoughts on Korea so we've talked a lot about the Pyeongchang Games in our class this semester it's been a very timely event for our class so we watched the opening ceremony and it's a very symbolic gesture the two careers marching in together but the only thing that I wonder about it is whether yes the event has been a good platform for two careers to show unification to march together in solidarity or to open this political dialogue but do you think that they use the Pyeongchang Games because of the timing because it was a convenient time for this to happen or do you think it was a conscious effort that South Korea or North Korea will use sport as a diplomatic tool moving forward as well The Pyeongchang Olympics was initially set and actually pursued by previous governments not this government so it was a kind of a big issue why Korea which already is a graduate from the developing stage of the nation need another big mega events in the middle of nowhere in North East Korea and also costing massive destruction of that is very much is a ecologically important area too so there was a massive development and then a real estate development and those urbanizing issues in that area and then those two government previous administrations were very keen to develop those areas rather than actual inter-Korean relationships or diplomats so suddenly this new government which actually was scheduled to come to the power later last year sorry this year needed to come into the power because the former president was impeached so they needed to turn around not as actual earlier government plan to develop those areas but for the more symbolic relations between inter-Korean and dialogue so that's actually happened within a few months times so that best shows how sorry that was their win and then afterward how this legacy can be sustained and maintained as well if it will be sustained through support dependency or trust exactly so not as just one of the issues so the my colleagues would like to actually make a formal suggestion to make it more regular exchange between North and South Korea and especially the football matches between Pyongyang and Seoul which started to hold this event in 1920 it was kind of a hundred years ago there was a regular football matches between Pyongyang and Seoul on the Japanese of course the British Empire introduced the football to South Korea I'm not, this is Korea, thanks very much and then under the industrialization of the Japanese imperialism hold the metropolitan and big cities like Pyongyang and Korea also started to form various amateur though clubs and then they had a very serious regular matches so they would like to resume this the whole regular exchange in terms of sports and culture after the Pyongyang Olympics so I wish they could do a little bit and it would depend on how coming to summits will go I think that last point speaks to what one of the old bastions of diplomacy I wish we would talk about the moments in time, the right moment for negotiation finding the right time as being the really critical thing so the long time is the problem Questions ladies and gentlemen I'm sure there's much that one could ask and if you don't I will Ian As you mentioned I was wondering if you knew what some of the reason behind that was and also I guess in terms of sport diplomacy does it matter, does anybody even care care at all about the fact that the Pyongyang games they didn't pass to the Irish The key issue was it was the first time North Korean Paralympic actually participated the first time so they would like to a little bit use this opportunity as a symbolic to display as well so South Korea wanted to show the consistency of this more friendly relationships but they accepted it and of course people were very much concerned Paralympic wasn't as successful as the Olympics in Pyongyang but given the whole earlier engagement of South Korean culture of sports the Paralympic also made a massive impact on the new understanding and the perception of the disabled disabilities and the social welfare system in South Korea so it was quite huge as well It's actually been measured in Korea today or is that just a opinion? Well the Olympic game impact studies by Korean government was published two years ago before the Olympics and then now third the report is now being carried out and we expect how we can measure and then there was a discussion so far and then there was a kind of methodology can be applied so far we've been discussing it and then there was a very tough issue about the disabilities and the social welfare system in North Korea in South Korea but we expect that the analysis of the legacy will be published within a few months time and does that apply to the Paralympics? They've tried to do the same monitoring and evaluation experience There are a couple of issues raised through the re-evaluation of the previous index system of the IOC because the diplomacy issues between neighboring countries were not very much a significant actual index in this whole the Olympic Games impact study because it's more focused on the domestic and international scale but not particularly few engaging countries such as North and South Korea's relations were absolutely unexpected and massive than expected so that how we can actually more systematically apply this factor into this index system is kind of very debatable now That's Mike for much academic debate as well Other questions or Jose? Thank you A story I just wanted to ask you Do you see any parallels between the Gold Coast and the Glasgow Commonwealth Games and what Barcelona did with the Games 1992? How do you see the parallels or what have you learned from all those events? Yes No, I drew upon a lot of John Hargreaves work on the 1992 Barcelona Games for my own for one more on Glasgow 2014 in the sense of there's a parallel there in terms of the tensions between catalanisation and espanyolisation and I guess the tensions between the kind of state, Castilian Madrid based government and then the Catalonian government about who takes credit for it there so in the sense of political symbolism there's a lot of analogies between the two events in 1992 Barcelona and 2014 Glasgow again being a second order event not to the same extent but again I guess if we then look at Gold Coast 2018 what Barcelona was widely praised for was actually using the Games for a form of economic and infrastructure regeneration and anyone who's visited Barcelona and seen some of the impact that I had on the coastline there and all the rest of it and see themselves the benefits it did have and I think in the Gold Coast they've kind of seen other events which have kind of used it for those purposes and then being able to kind of use it to drive through what is probably a 20 year plan in terms of economic and infrastructure regeneration in a more condensed period of time and really harness investment there as well the extent to which the Gold Coast will be successful Barcelona I'm doubtful of and I think Barcelona I guess turned that kind of turned the ideas of what legacy and what could be done about games around a little bit but again with Barcelona and the Gold Coast and Glasgow 2014 as I kind of tried to touch upon a presentation that's kind of the snuck into the back door the economics and infrastructure and tourism and everyone says what's about sport we're going to try and inspire regeneration in London 2012 or tackle health in a cottage in Glasgow and for me the rhetoric should just be a little bit more open and honest about actually we're doing it for these purposes we'll host it for a couple weeks but this is the real goal and if you can say that then fair enough and I think for Barcelona in 1992 there was a lot more openness about that before the games organisers the IOC, the FIFAs of this world the CGF almost said you must have a sporting legacy that must be almost part of the big document which forces people in my opinion to have to lie to have to say we know that all the evidence says this won't happen but you want us to say this so I'm going to say it anyway which everyone knows it sounds like applying for an ego on well yeah, no comment but so that's the thing so you can't blame host cities too much in the sense that they're just they're jumping through the hoops that they're asked to jump through some do it well, some do it badly and actually the three games I think broadly speaking are successes in different ways but again the skills are different gentlemen at the back there thank you very much quick question about Dennis Rodman much has been said about his involvement and friendship with the North Korean leader is there anything that behind it that would make us think that basketball in this case could make North Korean's position on sports in general any internalisation or opening the borders or something happening around it Lindsay's probably the expert on that well I don't know if I have tons to say about the exact Dennis Rodman issue I can say that in our discussions over the course of this past week on sports and diplomacy and exchanges certainly basketball has cropped up because one of these global sports that has always been there perhaps not as much in the limelight as recently but very much helping to transition between different regimes different political parts of the world and one of the examples we keep bringing up is China under the People's Republic certainly used a lot of basketball diplomacy in establishing or helping to cement its opening of relations with different countries in the west different countries in Eastern Europe in Asia so basketball has actually been at the forefront of a lot of this type of sports diplomacy but I'm certainly by no means the expert on Dennis Rodman in Korea so I actually fling that back at the panel Is there anything you're I mean whilst you're cogitating on that Jay I'll say something about the sort of celebrity diplomacy and I think there's a commodification of athletes that allows them a profile and a platform that means that they can communicate in a way that I would consider to be or to give them access to a diplomatic plane of communication but at the same time that's not their sole goal and indeed not even primary secondary or tertiary goal at many points their athletic career is the prime thing if they're an active athlete their commercial wellbeing is intimately intertwined with that goal and maintaining and establishing a relationship that allows that to be perpetuated now many top level athletes now who get paid large large amounts of money have either individual foundations or are contractually obliged to participate in foundation type activity so NBA cares being an example the premier league foundation each of these have a an athlete have a degree of liberty but also a degree of compulsions perhaps too strong a word but obligation to participate in a number of foundational sort of effectively charity style events and I think in that sense you do see the athlete as diplomat and you can attribute certain qualities that we'd like to see perhaps in our most Corinthian interpretation of Olympism as values that are universal and we would like to see replicated in other walks of life but equally athletes have failings like everyone else in society and that platform and that profile that they have means that that can be magnified and discussed in other channels in ways that are not necessarily helpful and I think this brings to perhaps the athlete is just the sort of symbol or the front end of this but the there's the dark side of sport and diplomacy as well which we need to be cognisant of and sport not only has its reconciliatory qualities but it has its aggressive qualities to it and they can exacerbate those existing tensions in the same way that they can mitigate against them and that really comes back to the function of diplomacy as opposed to the vehicle or the tool or the platform and that therefore the relationship needs to be well understood between the relationship in this case of the platform being sport and the goal of the enterprise you know the war in the Balkans in the early 1990s was absolutely stoked by external rivalries between different parts of what was then the Yugoslavia that broke up into Bosnia and Slovenia Yugoslavia Serbia etc and some of the worst human rights atrocities of the decade amongst others took place because of facilitated by football rivalries Stu here from Edinburgh could talk about the other city in Scotland where rivalries are very much to the floor and have cost people's lives so there's much here to be said about the profile that an athlete has either way in Dennis Rodman's case it's just bizarre it's my thought it is bizarre but it's very powerfully working well as well one thing I'm a little bit concerned is there very much is an instrumentalist view on sports they especially during this Olympics some kind of the political approach to the sport was just to utilize the sports or sportsmen and for certain purpose whether they have big national interest or for their some kind of the more diplomatic relations but sports also is not just about sidestep or this tool or instrument or for another bigger purpose they are always integrated into the certain societies so during the period of the formation of the unified female hockey teams there was a big debates whether North Korean players were not who didn't meet the global standard integrated into the South Korean team because they've been spending a couple of years to make the cut to the final and how you can actually the way they've been doing the South Korean government and then IOC was that well this sport is smaller than politics there is a big cut we need to think about and then sportsmen's perspective were very much marginalized at the time so whenever privilege a certain political view over or the purpose over on other small values that would create certain the issues later for instance the Pyongyang Soul and the North South Korean into communication should be dealt with the certain equal values not as a certain events and sports are just serving for bigger things so I'm a little concerned about the instrumentalist approach to this sport if I could just come in on that briefly apart from this Rodman all I have on that is it makes me smile every time I see that photo of him with Kim Jong-il but talking what Simon said about the dark side of it for the 2014 independence referendum there was an attempt by both sides to mobilise sports people to a yes vote or a no vote and the no vote was more successful we have actually had David Beckham roll him out and that would be a way of encouraging people to want to stay as part of the UK we had a lot of ex Scottish internationals and Rangers players and British athletes who were advocating a no vote but they have a slightly vested interest in the fact that their funding comes from the UK they train in the UK so there's elements there as well but on the dark side Andy Murray was one of the few that came out for a yes vote in the wee hours of the morning before and some of the vitro that he received and that was actually both sides but the vitro he received comments about being killed at Dunblane and all sorts of expertives from Twitter trolls Lindsay Sharp who came out for a no vote got likewise from the yes people on Twitter there as well and I think that's quite sad actually I think sports people and athletes should be able to have a political view of a platform and they're all human beings but as Simon was touching upon there's so many different commercial and not just commercial but kind of rules put in by national government bodies about you cannot and will not say this which I think is sad because actually maybe are a voice for different positions but again it's slightly different what Andy Murray and Lindsay Sharp might say and the reaction they would get compared to Dennis Rodman we've got a question from Linda and then one from Sean I think you've probably picked up on quite a bit as I've been waiting to ask a question so which is great but it was for me I was just wondering about the sort of the hidden sponsors here like Nike and the big commercial organisations that are international multinational and and how they mix up into this mix of political diplomacy and sports diplomacy and so on kind of what the impact is there and what the hidden things behind that are the commercialisation I guess of the outcomes from the events as well I'm going to take Sean's question as well mindful of time and he may will have something to say on that That's right, I just want to put this proposition to you is there an honesty to your bid like Glasgow London that is fundamentally an economic bid it's basically saying we're going to have this big festival it's really about economic generation so you do your numbers and you decide what you're going to do but there's a problem with things like Qatar Saatchi Russia World Cup and the way North Korea has manipulated Pyongyang is that essentially what the Olympic movement is doing is to allow regimes which are basically fundamentally anti-democratic to launder the reputations and in fact the sports movement and the bidding cities are actually complicit in this they're actually complicit in something which actually you know it's not it's not healthy for global politics I mean the Saatchi game is about the alleged doping but obviously there's a lot of reports that say it was the biggest money laundering exercise that has ever been implemented in the history of the world so I mean I was very struck by your comments about the way the particular cartoon you know actually is this actually quite dangerous is sport diplomacy practiced most effectively by regimes that you can't vote in that's a good question Sean I'm going to comment on Linda's first thinking about the answer to that but other people might like to chip into you know it is a multi-million, indeed billion dollar business and the real dynamic here I think over the last 15, 20, 25 years again which Sean will be able to talk to as well is the involvement of media corporations and in the the sort of adidas and sponsorship that you see on the banners is nothing compared to the medium by which you broadcast that and the transition from terrestrial free-to-air broadcast to digital satellite broadcast and indeed into the future where it's all available here that really is the sales dimension now what else you're selling at that point that's the real sneaky part of it if you like the sports gambling industry the rules and regulations on that are pretty loose not least because they are industries that have been regulated to the degree to which they have within national government structures and that we are now in transnational environment so it's not easy to implement or indeed get the buy-in consequences to any government structure some sort of sanction in an international environment where you have different jurisdictions because you do come back to jurisdictions of them to all those good bastions of international relations scholarship so I think the idea of multinational corporations and how they fit in this is something that I don't see as being particularly unique to sport but nonetheless sport manifests itself in a particular because of the communicative power so that's not just the ability to sell a shirt or a pair of football boots or what have you but the ability to be available and communicate across national boundaries age, gender, race to communities of like-minded individuals some of whom have access to finance and some of whom don't and that disparity is a real challenge if you're selling a coherent product and I don't think that reflects to sport that's part of the dilemma of selling the other education as well so that's one of the challenges I would see in that and it manifests itself in all sorts of ways the vested interests of contractual obligations image rights for athletes that's what the last part of any transfer dealing is the individual image rights who owns my right to sell my image to be on the front cover of the FIFA or the NBA 2K computer game the e-game environment that's not the athletic enterprise it's the representation of the athletic enterprise it's fascinating stuff and it's moving very very quickly I'll maybe try and segue between both questions firstly with the one about commercial sponsors and the impact I had one of the main benefits of my PhD doing the interviews was finding out about some of the backchanneling and the things that are happening behind the scenes so the SNP were threatened that if they made it political that they would be called out by other major parties and everyone that I spoke to from the SNP, Labour, Lib Dems, Greens, Conservatives all said the same there but what was really interesting and fortunately my interview said I could disclose their names but it was Tavish Scott from the Lib Dems said to me they had some very interesting discussions with some of the sponsors about if the SNP did try and politicise the games what would happen and they were going to pull out from the games they were going to withdraw their funding and they said explicitly if this games becomes politicised about the referendum we are pulling the plug so whilst the other parties might say well we put the SNP under pressure not to make this political it wasn't really it was the commercial sponsors going towards the budget which would have been the real factor there so when we think about diplomacy and governance about that there as well I guess it is those multi layers of influence that shape things along there and I think sponsors do have a big element there as well turning to Sean's very detailed and provocative and difficult question to answer I'm yes I agree that actually on the economic side of things is probably how the if we say the western countries and the more established countries now view this and if they were open and honest about it that would be great and I think a lot of other nations such as Russia elsewhere Qatar are using it too launder their reputation as you kind of said there but I don't think we are innocent in that sense there as well I think London 2012 in many ways was to rebrand the UK is something different to the extent as well within the Commonwealth was to kind of almost rebuild bridges and almost acknowledge Scotland's role within the empire and Scots like to almost think oh that was a Brits we Scots were all right but we were just as bad if not worse some of the things we did within the empire so I think we do it in different ways but as you say I think the final thought I'd have on it would be in terms of diplomacy what's really interesting about Russia and Qatar and all the rest of it is that they are even though they are not made democratic themselves they are using democratic means via votes in FIFA votes in IOC to influence other nations to vote for them and actually their diplomacy is actually been quite effective because they are getting enough votes to get people to go that way Qatar can offer to ship stadiums to other African nations and build them that way so they are almost using diplomatic means within without a shadow down I'm not absolving them of blame whatsoever but if that's the game of diplomacy and even if that's diplomacy what is front stage and the back stage stuff of the corrupt elements of it there as well we need to understand I'd say the chat I learned today diplomacy in governance is not just about states it's commercial actors and it's what's overt and clear and what's hidden behind there we might want to think diplomacy is something which is ambassadors and shaking hands and all kind of very formal but I think we now know in sport that it's corruption, it's bribery, it's all the other things that influence and make people work towards there and as someone who maybe is very dismissive or very upset by some of the ideologies and the human rights campaigns and the sorry records of some of the host nations it worries me in some ways that diplomatic means are being used to abuse what could be major sport in events Steve, can you wait for just for Mike and then we'll wrap up Thanks I've just been reflecting on one of your slides where you implied the ending of the Commonwealth Games because of it's becoming increasingly white dominated and you relate that to what are the drivers behind the games you've got the Commonwealth which is what a third of the world's population are within the Commonwealth but it's white dominated because the major states of India Nigeria, Pakistan underperform relatively to their population sizes so when you look at the dynamics when you look at the influence of government and non state actors driving the games what are the drivers behind your belief that the Commonwealth Games does not have a future I think possibly maybe misrepresentation if I think the coffee rooms don't have a future they will it was quite perilous for a while I mean when Durbin pulled out there was a little bit of concern about there Glasgow 2014 was deemed to be one that put it back on the right route and I don't think the Commonwealth Games don't have a future but I do wonder about their continued relevance if the media and the sponsors don't necessarily get on board with it there as well I think my concerns are what's the relevance of the games to the broader Commonwealth if it's not just embracing those other nations so it's actually going to be a Commonwealth Games but really it's for those 10-12 nations who have dominated historically and I guess my concern about the games more broadly is will it actually be a useful diplomatic means to almost foster warmer relationships with the more peripheral nations within the Commonwealth Games on the point of India, India is a very interesting one and actually India is probably the best games for a long time in terms of medals and something which they are quite keen to push in terms of their own sporting profile and whatnot but again if the hosting is 2026 in Kuala Lumpur that would be a good step forward but can we take it Scotland compete with Abuja in Nigeria and one Darbyn we're supposed to have the games and then they've had it stripped away can we make it something which is actually reflective of the wider Commonwealth movement rather than just the traditional bashings and I think that will really keep the games going forward not just as a sporting event but something which is worthwhile in terms of diplomacy as well otherwise I think it's a bit tokenism I don't think the games will finish at any point soon but it could be a few of the traditions down the line they might run into more sticky patches I mean I think it's a good question to ask this week because of course in London the Chogham meeting is happening now and last week the Commonwealth Games finished all of the Commonwealth Heads of Government here in the Imperial Capital and I think one of the questions is what impact is what happened in the previous two weeks 6,000 miles away on the Gold Coast having well a lot of those leaders will not ask she's been busy being to the Commonwealth Games and come back and the fact that we have that the particular comment on the Government of Heads but the Imperial Legacy that the United Kingdom has has been front and foremost of the UK news the past 48, 72 hours because of where are the quarter fifth of the world's population half the world being painted pink on the map etc etc so these are very salient reasons why sport has a role to play to my mind I take point entirely about the instrumentalism and the number of times that and I've certainly guilty of it but content analysis of role, vehicle, use medium for sport in the conversations we have is something that troubles me and I don't think that we've got we need to be very thoughtful about our use of the relationship which is why to my mind it's very much the multi-directional nature that matters, it's not someone doing something to someone else as it were, the metaphor it's actually about the relationship and the influencing factors across all of those those vectors that was me talking I'm going to draw events to a close now because we've had we need to get these people another drink for starters but I would like to thank you all very much for coming it's been a fascinating day whether you've been here this evening if those of us who are heading off we can meet just outside on the steps that would be great but thank you so much for coming and we look forward to continuing the conversation thank you