Oscar Pistorius makes history as first amputee athlete selected for the Olympics

The "Blade Runner" has been picked for South Africa's 4x400m team.

Oscar Pistorius has made history today by getting selected for South Africa’s 4x400m Olympics relay team. He will become the first amputee track athlete to compete at the Games. He came very close to qualifying for the individual 400m, missing out by less than a quarter of a second in his final qualifying race.

Pistorius was born without lower leg bones, and runs on crescent-shaped carbon fibre blades known as “Cheetah Flex-Feet”. Last year, he became the first amputee athlete to compete in the World Athletics World Championships, where he made the 400m semi-final.

The issue of whether his prosthetic limbs give him an unfair advantage over able-bodied athletes has been fiercely debated throughout his career. In 2007, the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) amended its competition rules, banning “any technical device... that provides a user with an advantage over another athlete not using such a device”. The IAAF denied that the amendment was specifically aimed at Pistorius, although it did prevent him from competing against able-bodied athletes at top-level meets. However, the decision was overturned in May 2008 by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), which found that there was no evidence that Pistorius’ prosthetics gave him a net advantage over his competitors.

It was this ruling that paved the way for today’s selection. There will still be dissenters – those who feel that Pistorius should have to compete only in the Paralympic Games – but with the CAS ruling behind him and a relay qualifying time under his belt, there is nothing stopping him now. Now that he’s proved that performance is really the only criteria, Pistorius could well be just the first in a series of amputee athletes who make their nations’ squads. Whatever his athletic achievements turn out to be, he’s made history just by getting selected.

Pistorius is hugely popular in South Africa. And given that his compatriots came home from the Beijing Olympics with just one athletics medal, at least one whole nation will be cheering if the “Blade Runner” strikes gold.


Oscar Pistorius competing at the Paralympic World Cup in May 2012. Photograph: Getty Images

Caroline Crampton is web editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

How can Britain become a nation of homeowners?

David Cameron must unlock the spirit of his postwar predecessors to get the housing market back on track. 

In the 1955 election, Anthony Eden described turning Britain into a “property-owning democracy” as his – and by extension, the Conservative Party’s – overarching mission.

60 years later, what’s changed? Then, as now, an Old Etonian sits in Downing Street. Then, as now, Labour are badly riven between left and right, with their last stay in government widely believed – by their activists at least – to have been a disappointment. Then as now, few commentators seriously believe the Tories will be out of power any time soon.

But as for a property-owning democracy? That’s going less well.

When Eden won in 1955, around a third of people owned their own homes. By the time the Conservative government gave way to Harold Wilson in 1964, 42 per cent of households were owner-occupiers.

That kicked off a long period – from the mid-50s right until the fall of the Berlin Wall – in which home ownership increased, before staying roughly flat at 70 per cent of the population from 1991 to 2001.

But over the course of the next decade, for the first time in over a hundred years, the proportion of owner-occupiers went to into reverse. Just 64 percent of households were owner-occupier in 2011. No-one seriously believes that number will have gone anywhere other than down by the time of the next census in 2021. Most troublingly, in London – which, for the most part, gives us a fairly accurate idea of what the demographics of Britain as a whole will be in 30 years’ time – more than half of households are now renters.

What’s gone wrong?

In short, property prices have shot out of reach of increasing numbers of people. The British housing market increasingly gets a failing grade at “Social Contract 101”: could someone, without a backstop of parental or family capital, entering the workforce today, working full-time, seriously hope to retire in 50 years in their own home with their mortgage paid off?

It’s useful to compare and contrast the policy levers of those two Old Etonians, Eden and Cameron. Cameron, so far, has favoured demand-side solutions: Help to Buy and the new Help to Buy ISA.

To take the second, newer of those two policy innovations first: the Help to Buy ISA. Does it work?

Well, if you are a pre-existing saver – you can’t use the Help to Buy ISA for another tax year. And you have to stop putting money into any existing ISAs. So anyone putting a little aside at the moment – not going to feel the benefit of a Help to Buy ISA.

And anyone solely reliant on a Help to Buy ISA – the most you can benefit from, if you are single, it is an extra three grand from the government. This is not going to shift any houses any time soon.

What it is is a bung for the only working-age demographic to have done well out of the Coalition: dual-earner couples with no children earning above average income.

What about Help to Buy itself? At the margins, Help to Buy is helping some people achieve completions – while driving up the big disincentive to home ownership in the shape of prices – and creating sub-prime style risks for the taxpayer in future.

Eden, in contrast, preferred supply-side policies: his government, like every peacetime government from Baldwin until Thatcher’s it was a housebuilding government.

Why are house prices so high? Because there aren’t enough of them. The sector is over-regulated, underprovided, there isn’t enough housing either for social lets or for buyers. And until today’s Conservatives rediscover the spirit of Eden, that is unlikely to change.

I was at a Conservative party fringe (I was on the far left, both in terms of seating and politics).This is what I said, minus the ums, the ahs, and the moment my screensaver kicked in.

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog.