Let's discuss the "white" elephant in the room.

HOWLERMONKEY Fri Mar 16, 2007 at 07:21:08 AM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

Sports minister Tessa Jowell's announcement confirmed that the expense of staging the Olympics would be far higher than thought when Britain was awarded the games in July 2005. This more than doubled the estimated cost of staging the 2012 London Olympics to 9.3 billion pounds. The Tories accuse the government  of "massive financial incompetence" and with this level of increasing expenditure, I agree with them. The Olympics will be a first class fiasco of financial incompetence, private sector profiteering, and self  congratulatory bullshit; that will be gone in a fortnight, leaving London with debts for years. And for what?.





tags: (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Let's discuss the "white" elephant in the room. | 10 comments (10 topical)

Re: Let's discuss (#1)

by Juvenal on Fri Mar 16, 2007 at 09:48:15 AM GMT

I guess you haven't been picked for the Olympic Team then Howler?

Seriously, I'll meet you half way on this.  As I understand it, the regeneration bill (£1.7bn) was always there, but had not previously been classified as part of the Olympic costs, so it's not new.  

The contingency seems sensible, but I'm not sure it's wise to advertise in advance how much you've set aside (contractors are always willing to match any budget you care to mention)

VAT was a complete cock-up, and heads should have rolled.

Mugging the Lottery for another £675m is a disgrace.

Irrespective of the money, I think it will be a terrific occasion.  Think of it like a wedding - it costs a fortune for such a short time, but everyone enjoys themselves (I'm sure someone will come along later and wreck this analogy).


Re: Let's discuss the "white" elephant (#2)

by Glass House on Fri Mar 16, 2007 at 01:06:24 PM GMT

I agree that there have been some cock ups, but I agree with Juvenal above.

Sometimes its worth doing something that can't be quantified and put into a profit and loss account.

The great exhibition, visiting the moon, hosting the World Cup, Council run fireworks displays, the Notting Hill Carnival - none of those were/are done to make profits or even break even(although they all have some monetary benefit). It's about civilization, community and civic endeavour.


London Olympics 2013 (#3)

by Mark Wadsworth on Fri Mar 16, 2007 at 02:26:41 PM GMT

Howlermonkey, I completely and utterly agree.

If nothing else, why couldn't they just have updated and expanded the sites in Manchester where we held the Commonwealth Games not all too long ago? Why is it necessary for all events to take place within a few square miles anyway? Why not tennis at Wimbledon, cycling in the Midlands, track and field in Manchester, football events in Wales and swimming in Leeds?


Re: London Olympics 2013 (#4)

by HOWLERMONKEY on Fri Mar 16, 2007 at 04:41:00 PM GMT

Your point about Manchester ect.  is well taken; and the Lottery £675m will strip small sports of thear funding. I hope to be travaling up the Lea river at easter, I will undoughtly see whats what.


[ Parent ]

Re: London Olympics 2013 (#5)

by JR on Fri Mar 16, 2007 at 09:06:04 PM GMT

Well it's the IOC that decides that the Olympics are held in a city and not in the country as a whole. This is for practical and logistical reasons and it's part of the Olympic tradition - something which cannot easily be eroded.

London is the only city in this country capable of hosting an Olympic games and I'm very pleased that they got it. I live in Manchester and Manchester is sadly not big enough (yet) to hold an Olympic games.


[ Parent ]

Manchester Olympics 2013 (#7)

by Mark Wadsworth on Fri Mar 16, 2007 at 10:13:22 PM GMT

Maybe not, but it is surely big enough to host (say) the track and field events.


[ Parent ]

Re: Manchester Olympics 2013 (#10)

by JR on Sun Mar 18, 2007 at 08:51:43 PM GMT

Holding all the different sports in different cities would be a logistical nightmare.

All 200 countries would have to distribute their teams widely around the country meaning there would be no single Olympic village and costs would soar. The world media would simply not bother covering events in the smaller cities. And the government would have to spend a small fortune creating the necessary infrastructure and security arrangements in each city.


[ Parent ]

Re: Let's discuss the "white" elephant (#6)

by JR on Fri Mar 16, 2007 at 09:12:09 PM GMT

The Olympics will be a first class fiasco of financial incompetence, private sector profiteering, and self  congratulatory bullshit; that will be gone in a fortnight, leaving London with debts for years. And for what?.

What an incredibly negative and uninspiring thread howlermonkey.

How about just for the sheer sporting and cultural excellence?

Private sector profits? And this is a bad thing why? Would we prefer private sector companies to go bust and sack all their workers?

And if you think that the benefits of the Olympics will only last a mere fortnight then that's incredibly short-sighted.

The UK economy will gain from the Olympics around three times the amount of money spent on it.

The rising costs do concern me, but not nearly enough to stop me supporting these Games. They will be a great occasion for the whole country and will leave a postive lasting lagacy for decades to come, no matter how much they cost.


Re: Let's discuss the "white" elephant (#8)

by HOWLERMONKEY on Fri Mar 16, 2007 at 10:50:53 PM GMT

"What an incredibly negative and uninspiring thread howlermonkey." Yes. Its Rubbish! Not everybody is besotted with sport. Some of us DO  feel uninspired... why are lots of tedious people running and jumping ?

"How about just for the sheer sporting and cultural excellence"? . See my previous article "The price of gold."

"Private sector profits? And this is a bad thing why? Would we prefer private sector companies to go bust and sack all their workers?" The on-site contractors have already started to ramp up the price,( The Prescott lock cock-up, for one) knowing that the Government will pay anything for the "prestige" of the games . Also the UK's construction industry is currently doing exceptionally well without the Olympics, particularly in London. Just have a  trip around the east London in general; at the moment and there are innumerable sites under construction; so going bust and sacking all their workers is a facile argument.

"And if you think that the benefits of the Olympics will only last a mere fortnight then that's incredibly short-sighted". To some extent you were correct in this , and that the Lea Valley will be redeveloped. This should be done anyway. Without doubt the area is the butt end of London, which is a great shame. The Olympics will bring her short term gain and then the  poverty and deprivation will return.  ( I wish I was wrong about this, but I fear that I won't be.)

"The UK economy will gain from the Olympics around three times the amount of money spent on it."  I think you're just plain wrong. Could you  show me figures from previews  games supporting this? Remember Athens will be paying for their games for the next 18 years or more.

As to your last point. Again, I think the Olympics are complete waist of the UK's resources. It makes the Trident programme look  like good value.


[ Parent ]

Re: Let's discuss the "white" elephant (#9)

by JR on Sun Mar 18, 2007 at 08:47:21 PM GMT

Not everybody is besotted with sport. Some of us DO  feel uninspired... why are lots of tedious people running and jumping?

Well fortunately, most people in this country like sporting and cultural excellence coming from around the world to visit our country.

To some extent you were correct in this , and that the Lea Valley will be redeveloped. This should be done anyway.

Should, but won't without the Olympics.

Remember Athens will be paying for their games for the next 18 years or more.

The local government are, but the Athens economy as a whole (public and private) has benefited enormously, especially in terms of new infrastructure.

It makes the Trident programme look  like good value.

I hope Trident is a waste of money because that means we never had to fire one of them.


[ Parent ]

Let's discuss the "white" elephant in the room. | 10 comments (10 topical)