Letter from the Editor: Does the world still want (or need) the Commonwealth Games?

Is it time to have a serious, grown-up conversation about the future of the Commonwealth Games, given the increasing costs of holding a sporting event that lasts less than a fortnight but takes years to pay off?

When the former Victorian premier Dan Andrews announced last year his state was withdrawing from hosting the 2026 Commonwealth Games, he was blasted by all corners of the globe.

He said at the time it was an “easy” decision, citing an anticipated cost blowout from an original estimate of $2.6 billion to more than $6 billion (a figure which has been disputed).

“I will not take money out of the hospitals and schools to fund an event that is three times the cost as estimated and budgeted for last year,” Mr Andrews said in July 2023.

“I’ve made a lot of very difficult decisions in this job – this is not one of them. Frankly, $6 to $7 billion for a 12-day sporting event … we are not doing that. That does not represent value for money; that is all cost and no benefit.”

Just weeks after Mr Andrews’ bombshell announcement, Alberta withdrew its support for a bid centred around Calgary/Edmonton to host the 2030 Commonwealth Games, also citing the high cost – an estimated $2.68 billion.

That’s left the 2030 Games without a host. Just last week at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Samoa, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer was on a mission to try to find a host country from among partners at the gathering willing to put their hand up.

Recent news that Glasgow, Scotland has been confirmed to replace Victoria as host of the 2026 Games has been welcomed by Games organisers and athletes, but the Games will be a vastly slimmed down version of the last event held in Birmingham, England in 2022.

The scaled-back Games will only feature 10 sports – just two more than at the original Empire Games in Canada in 1930, and almost half the number than at Birmingham.

About half the number of athletes who competed in Birmingham (4822) are expected to be in Glasgow, athletes and support staff will stay in hotel accommodation rather than an athletes’ village and the event will have low-cost opening and closing ceremonies. These sound like eminently sensible decisions.

Does the world really need to splash the cash on two mammoth sporting events every four years, especially when most sports have their own international tournaments or world championships?

Birmingham is estimated to have spent about $1.4 billion on hosting the Games and it cost the Gold Coast about $1.6 billion in 2018.

That’s an awful lot of money to spend and it’s no wonder cities are thinking twice about throwing money at an event that some may argue only benefits a small proportion of the population.

Yes, we love seeing our Aussie athletes excel on a stage where they dominate the medal tally and we get all jingoistic and teary when the flag is raised and Advance Australia Fair is played.

Supporters will argue that the Commonwealth Games offers athletes a chance to perform on a world stage, to experience a milestone on the way to preparing for an Olympics.

They’ll say the Games bring joy and happiness to millions around the world and that’s true. It may even inspire a few to follow their sporting dreams, or at least get off the couch for a walk.

They’ll point out that the host city and country also get an economic boost from the influx of athletes, supporters and visitors, as well as the exposure to worldwide TV audiences.

All fair points, but are they enough to sway the argument?

It was Australian-born Astley Cooper who first broached the idea of such games in 1891, calling for sports competitions to be held to “demonstrate the unity of the British Empire”.

We all know the British Empire is a vastly different beast these days and many question if it’s really something to be celebrated.

The recent visit of the King and Queen to our Commonwealth shores certainly attracted huge crowds, but it also – again – reignited the debate about whether Australia wants to break away from the monarchy and stand on its own two feet.

Australia is one of only a handful of the Commonwealth’s 72 nations and territories that still has the King as the head of state.

Regardless, the future of the Commonwealth Games is not a discussion about the monarchy versus a republic.

It’s about whether the costs justify a two-week sporting event – financial costs, the impacts on the environment and global warming and especially the social costs of cleaning up the house before visitors arrive; building houses for athletes and officials while the homeless are hidden out of sight.

How can countries justify spending public money to build impressive, world-class sporting venues when hospitals and health systems desperately need funding, schools are overcrowded and people are crying out for a roof over their heads? And that’s just in Australia.

If the Games must continue, then perhaps Glasgow – through necessity not choice – has stumbled on the right model for the future; a back-to-basics, no-frills version where the focus truly is on the athletes, not the amount it costs to host them.