Any change occurring in Polish public sport institutions is usu-ally planned and enforced by law. The organisational structure of physical culture in Poland has been characterised by the associative status of its basic units since the beginning of the twentieth century. For years, the system was termed ‘state-civil’, not so much because it relied on associative structures but rather because of the construction of the central administrative body responsible for this domain (a collegial entity referred to as the
‘committee’). The institution was usually named the Committee for Physical Culture although it could temporarily assume various additional sub-units (e.g., physical culture was sometimes associ-ated with tourism or the youth services). However, the crucial
factor was the collegial nature of the committee, representing vari-ous social groups which would benefit from physical culture and its application to their needs. Committee members represented the sectors of healthcare and welfare, education, national defence, internal affairs, trade unions, sport unions and other groups.
Sub-committees developed temporarily, when the body was also responsible for tourism, and its decisions were made collegially as resolutions. The committee chairman was appointed by the Prime Minister. However, the Committee of Physical Culture ceased to exist in 1991 but left a team of officials, and was renamed the Office of Physical Culture and Tourism – Urza˛d Kultury Fizycznej and Turystyki (UKFiT); a change that failed to register with either the wider public or those closely involved with the sector. This restructuring was one in a long series of administrative reforms that began in 1946, see Figure 7.2.
The dissolution, on 30 June 2002, of the Office of Physical Culture and Sport (Urza˛d Kultury Fizycznej and Sportu, UKFiS), the successor to UKFiT, brought an end to a 75 year history of hav-ing a central public administration body responsible for the man-agement of physical culture. Since 2002, responsibility for the sector has shifted between three ministries: Ministry of National Education, Ministry of National Education and Sport and cur-rently Ministry of Sport. Figure 7.2 illustrates the historical changes in the naming of the central national administrative body.
Most of the administrative bodies mentioned in Figure 7.2 acted as an independent central office, with the exception of PUWFiPW and UKFiS, of which the first was subordinate to the Ministry of National Defence and the second to the Ministry of National Education. Most assumed the form of collegial bodies or committees, which were popular in those times. Jaworski (1993) claims that it is through the committees that the state-social model of physical culture was realised in Poland. Unlike the committees, offices and ministries are monocratic bodies within which all power rests in the hands of the president or minister. Under socialist rule, sport, notably elite sport, was one of the top priorities in the politics of many socialist states, to which it offered the only opportunity to mark their presence on the international stage. Hence the crucial importance of the cen-tral state administration body responsible for this domain.
Changes similar to those described for the central adminis-tration also occurred at the regional – voivodeship – level, and resulted from changing state policies and the role of regional-level public administration. The changes in state administra-tion structures also applied to the governance of physical culture. In the sport domain, state administration bodies were to promote and supervise the latter through monitoring the
activities of sport associations in their respective territories.
Their responsibilities also included supervising regional struc-tures of medical care for the sport sector and managing sports infrastructure, most importantly, the development and mod-ernisation of sports facilities.
At this point, it should be noted that the structural links between voivodeship physical culture governance units and their local (gmina) counterparts were rather limited. The latter were governed by boards appointed by local councils (local self-government bodies), which had considerable autonomy from state administration in their territory.5 Meanwhile, the subordination of voivodeship physical culture departments to the central state administration body (UKFiT) was purely func-tional, since they reported to the Prime Minister via their respec-tive voivods.
One of the major changes in the systemic transformation was the transfer of authority from central administration bodies to Figure 7.2 Historical changes in the naming of the central national administrative body for the management of physical culture in Poland since 1946 (Source: Adapted from Jaworski, 1993)
19644850525456586062646668707274767880828486889092949596980002040607
PUWFiPW
State Office for Physical and Military Education (Pan´stwowy Urzad Wychowania Fizycznego i Przysposobienia Wojskowego) Main Office of Physical Culture (Glo´wny Urzad Kultury Fizycznej)¸
¸
MS
Main Committee for Physical Culture (Glówny Komitet kultury Fizycznej )
Main Committee for Physical Culture and Tourism (Glówny Komitet kultury Fizycznej i Turystyki )
Main Committee for Physical Culture and Sport(G lówny Komitet kultury Fizycznej i Sportu)
Committee for youth and Physical Culture (Komitet do Spraw Mlodziezy i Kultury Fizycnej)
Ministry of Sport (Ministerstwo Sportu)
Ministry of National Education and Sport (Ministerstwo Edukacji Narodowej i Sportu)
Ministry of National Education (Ministerstwo Edukacji Narodowej )
¸
Office of Physical Culture and Sport (Urzad Kultury Fizycznej i Sportu)¸ Office of Physical Culture and Tourism (Urzad Kultury Fizycznej i Turystyki ) –
the lowest level, that is, to local communities, which translates into increasing the role of local communities in the activities of bottom-level territorial administration in various domains of social life. Territorial self-government is a basic form of civic activity in communes – gminas – and is represented by commu-nity councils elected by commucommu-nity members. At the bottom level, administrative tasks, which include provision for phys-ical culture and recreational and sports facilities, are conducted by two structures: local state administration (local offices) and territorial self-government.
Local territorial self-government units are also obliged to organise and monitor the physical education of pre-school and school children. This issue has grown in importance since 1 January 1994, with the mandatory transfer of secondary schools under the authority of district self-governments. Reinstating extra-curricular sport or recreational activities should be among the priorities arising after schools came under the con-trol of local administration, as well as forming good physical culture habits to last for life. And school gyms should be avail-able to children and young people from their respective local communities. The strengthening of territorial self-governments appears to be a necessary precondition to any systemic trans-formation, in particular, in the context of decentralisation and self-governance. Although strictly necessary, the process of transferring competence, rights and responsibilities from the central to local level is proceeding at a very slow pace. This is due to the fact that, along with legal and organisational change already initiated, it also requires a revamping of organisational culture and a new approach by local officials and all commu-nity members to governance and management strategies.