Joe Wicks is doing good work. His efforts to get kids moving – both during lockdown and now through his Government supported “Activate” animations movement campaign – deserve credit. Getting kids moving is a critically important mission for the whole nation. But as someone who’s spent decades working in sport and youth development, I have to ask: is this really the best we can do?
We’re told children are too sedentary, too screen-bound, too unfit. So, the response is… more screen time? This isn’t a critique of Joe Wicks himself, but of a system that believes the chronically low levels of physical activity among children and adolescents can be solved with 10-minute online workouts. As exciting and engaging as these are, if the real-world infrastructure young people need to move, grow and thrive continues to be dismantled, the chance for young people to continue moving beyond the sessions ends.
Since 2010, youth services have been cut by over 70%. More than 1,200 youth centres have closed. The recently published Raising the Nation Play Commission’s report showed that outdoor play has halved in a generation. Without safe places to play, take risks, move -both indoors and outdoors – young people are deprived of a vast array of physical, psychological, and social benefits. These benefits come from working with others, navigating challenges, exploring environments, engaging with trusted adults. They can’t all come from watching activity on a screen.
Not only this, but the Active Travel budget has been halved. And yet the Government has just announced a new £650 million subsidy for electric vehicles. Imagine if that went into school playgrounds, improved recreational grounds, playing fields saved, cycle paths developed.
We have an obesity crisis on one hand and a critical lack of long-term investment to solve it on the other. Five-minute videos won’t fix this. They never could.
We are not suffering from a crisis of motivation, we’re suffering from a crisis of access. And worse, a crisis of ambition among adults to make young people’s lives better. Particularly for those living in poverty.
In the UK, nearly half of middle-class children take part in five or more extracurricular activities. For young people in high-deprivation communities, that number drops to just 6.5%. It’s not just a lifestyle gap, but an opportunity gap. Poorer children aren’t less interested in sport and being active; it’s that the places, people and programmes that enable participation don’t exist where they live.
Spending that EV subsidy on cargo bikes for low-income families would do far more to unlock access to travel, work, and sport than helping those who can already afford cars and extra-curricular activities to get a new car slightly cheaper. Viable transportation options for those who cannot afford cars help families to contribute, connect, and move freely.
Movement is a right. But in Britain today, that right is distributed by postcode.
A bold national vision would ensure that every child could walk or cycle five minutes from home to a safe, free place to move – and that teenagers are included, not excluded, from that vision. It would embed structured physical development in schools with the same seriousness we give to literacy and numeracy. We have national leads for nearly every subject. Why can’t PE experts have the remit, resources and policy tools to develop children in the way they deserve?
At Greenhouse Sports, we’ve spent nearly 25 years building a Positive Youth Development through Sport model that does just that. We embed full-time coach-mentors into schools in some of the most deprived parts of London, Portsmouth and Leicester, working with over 8,500 young people annually to develop not just physical literacy, but self-esteem, resilience, leadership, and connection. These are not “soft” outcomes. They’re critical for academic success and future employment. Participants in our programmes attend up to 14 more days of school each year than their peers. They improve their behaviour. They report higher wellbeing. And crucially – they get jobs, contribute to their communities, and have opportunities to break the cycle of poverty.
A love of sport, physical activity, and movement doesn’t develop in isolation. It happens when young people feel safe, seen, and supported. Screens can’t provide that. People can. There are better models out there. Look at LTAD champions like Jeremy Frisch, or the Norwegian approach to child development that prioritises connection, natural movement, and play as a form of learning. These are not utopias – they’re political choices backed by ambition.
What we’re doing here isn’t enough. If we believe movement can change lives – and it can – then we must invest in the people and places that make it possible. Not just for some children. For all of them.