Sport for drug abuse prevention: promoting a drug-free society through sport and the Olympic ideal

Russia. The objective is to prevent drug abuse through sports and healthy lifestyles. W promote the need to fight drugs among young people, make the right choices, etc. 

Title
No comments.

PP1
Russia. We have one small proposal to agree on final language: “drug abuse and consumption of drugs” would be a good idea.

Venezuela. The text should reflect precisely the language reflected in the document. 

Russia. The exact language of the political declaration should be included: “illicit consumption of drugs”. The para is agreed.

PP1bis / PP2 /PP3
No comments. 

PP4
Canada. We would propose changing “sporting events” to “sports”. Para is agreed. Same on PP7.

PP5 / PP6  
No comments. 

PP7
Canada. Wants to replace again “sporting events” with “sports”. 

UK. Reacts to Canada’s proposal. The proposal of “sports” does not retain the original meaning. Canada agrees.

PP8
No omments. 

PP9
UK. Proposal to make the paragraph broader and not only focus on the Winter Games in 2014. India supports the UK proposal. 

Russia. We want the text to include concrete games.

Mexico. We also believe that there is no need to make a reference to a specific set of games. This does not lead us on to look backwards. We should not focus on events of the past but retain generic language.

Russia. Without past, there is no future. 

Yemen. We want a proposal for compromise to highlight the importance of the Olympic Games. This is not acceptable for Russia.

The paragraph is bracketed. 

PP10
India. We should not mention specific games, because many more have been held. So we can just elude elegantly to general Olympic games.  

Russia. We think it is helpful to us to mention all these games and not talk about nameless events. We prefer to have concrete listings in the past and the future. We suggest that we retain the text as it stands now.

Belgium. We have sympathy with India, we are not entirely comfortable with the listing of certain Games. We cannot name a few and ignore others. Supported by the UK. 

Canada. We thank Belgium and support what we are saying. We also want to add “participation by youth in sport, particularly at the Youth Olympic Games”.

Russia. The Canadian proposal is acceptable, but we want to continue negotiations on the other issue. Perhaps in informals.

Singapore. We support the UK and India on their position. 

The paragraph is put in brackets.

OP1
Belgium. We informally discussed the resolution last week and there was a proposal to address the issue of promoting a behaviour free of drugs and harms “during and beyond the Olympic” games. We propose that this is deleted.

Russia. To respond, in Russia we have research from well known scientists that Olympic high-risk sports can prevent drug abuse. People who use drugs have a different reward system in their brain and high-risk sports have the same effect on their game – they need it for their brain. We want to retain the text as it was. 

UK. We support Belgium. 

Russia. We want to stick to the original text. 

Belgium: is that from people doing sports? Hard to understand.
Mexico: Suggests a change in language to include paralypmic committee.

Belgium: Now clearer. It is that the lifestyle is free from drug abuse. No need to time qualifiers.

Canada: Supports Mexico and Belgium’s amendments

OP1 agreed

OP2
Mexico: Asks for similar amendments from the previous paragraph. “sports-related organisations”.

Belgium: delete part of the paragraph because it repeats langauge.

OP2 agreed

OP3
Mexico: move civil society forward in the sentence.

Finland: Would like to insert a paragraph after OP3. Sport is important, but commercialisation of sport is an important issue and the costs of participating are rising which may exclude some people

insert 3bis: Also encourages emmber states to promote equal access to sports and other heathy pursuits for young people;

USA: What is meant with “the volunteer movement”? Unsure of this language. We want people to volunteer to these organisations. Change the language

Canada: Supports the USA’s change

Norway: no objections to US proposal.

OP3 agreed

OP3bis
Belgium: add in “without discrimination of any kind”

Australia: Support the idea behind 3bis. Would like to see language around why sport should acessible in this context.

Chair: Add in “as a measure of drug abuse prevention.”

UK: change “measures” to “means”

3bis agreed

OP4
Mexico: add in clarification about “publicly recognised”

Netherlands: Can we ask athletes to be goodwill ambassadors? Is it part of our mandate. Some sportspeople are just in it for the sports and stay out of politics. We should withdraw this paragraph

Russia: Sports people have already been asked to do this. Okay with work on new language

UK: Some sportspeople will be on board. But we haven’t asked.

Secretary: talks about a Monaco football player

Belgium: A monaco football player, not an olympic or paralympic.

Australia: proposed new language for OP4bis or replace OP4 “welcomes the leader ship and contribution of atheltes from all sports in promoting a society free of drug abuse, by emphasising participation in sports as a healthy, productive and fulfilling alternative to drug abuse.”

Yemen: No agreement about the role of atheletes, proposes new language. Add in “possible” to make it less concrete.

Finland: change “welcome” to “invite”, means that we don’t assume they willl come

Mexico: invite or welcome works. 

Norway: “drug free lifestyle” rather than free from drug abuse. Less stigmatising

Netherlands: second the idea of deleting OP4 and replacing with OP4alt

Mexico: Would like to support OP4alt.

Russia: delete possible. leading rather than leadership.

USA: Support OP4alt. Add in language about clarifying the role athletes can play.

Canada: further clarification

Italy: Support proposals. Supports “drug free lifestyle”

UK: delete “drug-free”

Chair: delete OP4 and retain OP4alt. OP4alt agreed

OP5
It has been deleted. 

OP6
Mexico: who should follow, it’s not clear. Member states or organisations, UNODC?

Russia: the commission

Chair: can you suggest wording

Russia: it’s normal resolution language

US: unclear about what this para supplies that’s not already in the document. Delete this paragraph.

UK: support deletion. Rejects Russian assertion that this is normal language

Belgium: Also like to delete the para. 

Netherlands: Support deletion

Russia: Do not delete. Go back to orignal language.

CHair: bracket and renegotiate in 

Belgium: what exactly is within mandate, when it comes to sport, of this commission. 

Scretariat: It’s open to other agencies within the forum

Chair: Bracket, and leave to informals