This week I attended the first Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee after the Summer recess. As part of the committee’s ongoing inquiry into the London 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympics Games, they called upon Boris Johnson, Mayor of London and Lord Moynihan, Chairman of The British Olympic Association to give oral evidence. The session focused on preparations for the 2012 Games, lessons from the Beijing 2008 and elite sporting performance.
As I predicted, the cost of the London 2012 Olympic Games was a pertinent issue for the committee, especially in light of the current economic climate. In his manifesto, Boris Johnson highlighted the importance of cost control in the planning of the Games; in return the committee asked him if he still believed the cost of the Games could be contained. Boris was adamant that no further money was needed from the taxpayer and he was reluctant to see early spending of the contingency funds. Mr Johnson stressed that 25% of the budget had been spent, while only 2% of the contingency had been used.
The budget for the London 2012 Games is almost half of that of this year’s Olympics in Beijing, so Philip Davies MP rightly asked Boris how we avoid the London Games being considered as a ‘poor man’s Beijing’ and how we compete on a lower budget. Boris answered that we should not expect a carbon copy of the Beijing Games, according to him the London Games would be a more “cosier” affair with a greater sense of intimacy.
As the athletic stadium in Stratford is set to hold 80,000 people only 11,000 less than the Bird’s Nest Stadium in Beijing, I’m not yet convinced how intimate the London 2012 Olympics Games can really be.
By Danielle Thomas
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment