« A busy night at the castle | Main | The running of the bulls »

Dump the Olympics

Telegraph | News | Massive blow to London Olympics

Blow? What blow? They get an old boy in to run the brickies on time and on budget and he finds he can't. Because of the politicians, for instance:

Derek Wyatt, the Labour MP who chairs the all-party Olympics committee at Westminster, agreed that building costs were likely to be far higher than original estimates.

But Mr Wyatt dismissed Mr Lemley as "out of his depth" and said it was commonplace for Olympic project costs the world over to increase.

"Original costs spell 'x' and come out as a 'y'. I think Mr Lemley was out of his depth."

That is an old Labour Councillor who just scraped into Parliament (by 74 votes on the third recount) telling the boss of an international building consultancy he is out of his depth. It might be acceptable to expect the builder's estimate for your extension to be a wild fiction, but you are a fool if you don't actually work out what the real costs are going to be first. If you expected the estimate you told the public was going to be massively wrong then you lied to them.

Original Budget:

Costs

* £560 million for new venues, including £250 million for the Olympic Stadium.
* £65 million for the Olympic village.
* £1.5 billion to run the Games.
* £200 million on security.

Revenue

* £1.5 billion from a special Olympic National Lottery game.
* £625 million from a council tax surcharge of £20 per year for London households.
* £560 million from IOC television and marketing deals.
* £450 million from sponsorship and official suppliers.
* £300 million from ticket sales.
* £250 million from the London Development Agency.
* £60 million from licensing.

The bid team believed that London could end the Games with a surplus of more than £100 million.

Present Cost estimate "£2.4 billion but that is now believed to be approaching £5 billion." And I will bet it is really going to be 10 by the time they finish.

Is it really to late to dump this debacle back on Paris?

Comments

'ang on a mo'.

They claim that the bloody event would have generated a surplus of 100 million do they?

But if you look at the sources of revenue, 2,375 million of the 3,185 million income isn't from sales - it's from bloody subsidies. Subsidies stolen from the pockets of decent, hardworking people otherwise known as taxes (and before anyone claims the "special lottery" is different - lotteries are a tax on innumeracy).

Only a bloody socialist with a moron's flawed concepts of business could claim that an event that costs 3,185 million to stage and only brings in 810 million in revenue could be a success or generate a "surplus".

The Brits, and Londoners in particular, are being taken for a ride big time over this. For what? Tony's tarnished glory? It's all horse cobs if you ask me.

Some other questions - why is the ODA and associated bodies not subject to the FOI Act. Something to hide maybe.

Who is going to pay for the new transport links, the updated transport links, the water and sewage infrastructure both new and upgraded, the energy infrastructure which is needed to run the vast It infrastructure. And it goes on, compulsory purchase, relocations, Ken's giveaways to foreigners, entertaining the vast Olympic organization.

Latest estimate I heard is the Beijing games are going to cost around $40 billion and that is in a very cheap labour environment and compensation for having your land seized is not getting lead poising in the brain.

I cannot see the total cost of the games being less than £30billion and potentially much higher as normally 15 year infrastructure timetables are compressed to 3 or 4 years.

Post a comment