Morning:
13°c
As the credit crunch tightens, and private-sector funding for the 2012 Olympics dries up, we learned today that another Games facility — the media centre — has joined the athletes' village in the financial crisis zone.
Neither can be allowed to fail. But the increasing likelihood is that both will bite far more deeply into the public purse than originally intended, at best taking a huge chunk out of 2012's contingency budget and at worst threatening what everyone has been solemnly promising there won't be, an overrun.
The growing squeeze on the Olympic budget makes it more important than ever that we not waste money on venues which even the Games organisers admit will have no legacy, no post-Games existence, yet will come at considerable expense. There is one very obvious candidate.
Over the summer, the Evening Standard has been reporting the growing concern among residents of south-east London about the plans to put the Olympic equestrian events in Greenwich Park, the oldest Royal Park in London and the only urban park in Britain which is also a Unesco World Heritage site.
The park will be partly closed for a total of 10 months in 2011 and 2012 as a temporary 23,000-seat arena and a four-mile cross-country course built in it. Trees will be pruned and hundreds of ancillary buildings erected. The opponents, including the Friends of Greenwich Park, say the park is too small and may suffer permanent damage.
An official value-for-money review into the venue has already been ordered. But London 2012, and more puzzlingly the local council, are clinging on to Greenwich as if their lives depended on it.
This month, the council's official newspaper, Greenwich Time, staged an almost frenzied show of support for the park. Page one piped: “Our time is NOW! Greenwich has sprinted into a clear lead to ensure that the borough gets the best possible benefits from London 2012 ...”
On page two, an article ordered us to “stop all the moans”. On page three, the “news” story was headlined: “Course the Royal Park will be fine!” Page four had a supportive reader's letter (and one against — ah, balance!) On page five, Greenwich schoolchildren were “jumping at the chance to get into the equestrian world as the borough looks forward to staging the events in Greenwich Park”.
Page six: “You can run for our 2012 hopefuls.” Page seven: “Cultural feast sets off four-year party before 2012 London Olympics.” Page nine: “Greenwich was promoted as the No 1 choice for Chinese business at the Olympics ...” Pages 10 and 11: “Get set to welcome the world.” And so on, and on, over about 75 per cent of the paper, in an operation with about as much finesse as a cruise missile.
Most local councils have simple enough pleasures: digging up roads, erecting pointless new signs, issuing fixed penalty notices. More exciting even than these, though — guaranteed to induce complete loss of reason in any locally elected representative — is the prospect of hosting an “iconic” event. But why?
Take the Olympic equestrianism. The unfortunate truth is that neither Greenwich Time, for all its thousands of words of puffery, nor anyone else at the council, can explain how 10 days of equestrian events will provide any “benefits” for anyone in the borough, “best possible” or otherwise.
The idea that a generation of south London schoolchildren will be inspired to take up equestrianism by seeing an afternoon's TV coverage from Greenwich is transparent fantasy. Apart from a handful of five-second cutaways, the pictures viewers will see — horses jumping over fences — will in any case be exactly the same as if they were coming from Paris or Ulan Bator.
It won't even be a decent party for the duration of the event. Ordinary south Londoners will be unable to get near Greenwich Park: it is simply too small to accommodate even most of the sport's existing followers, let alone any new faces.
Unlike the venues in Newham, all the facilities for these events are temporary and there are no associated housing or infrastructure projects. At the same time as they claim huge benefits for Greenwich, the council and the Olympic organisers make a virtue of the fact that the borough's Olympics will leave no trace behind them. They simply cannot have it both ways.
Perhaps the benefits will be economic? But investors do not bring capital and jobs to an area based on its ability to host a horse competition. They make rational calculations about its proximity to markets, transport links, qualified labour and cheap office or factory space. For Greenwich, the Olympics won't change any of that.
The council protests that the Olympics will “put Greenwich on the map”. It won't: the horses will be competing with lots of sexier sports for TV time. Anyway, Greenwich is on the map already, for precisely the things that the Olympics are putting in jeopardy.
The truth is that Greenwich's economy is far likelier to be harmed than helped by the Olympics. By the council's own admission, tourism is worth £532 million a year to the borough, directly supporting 8,300 local jobs. But the centrepiece of Greenwich's tourist industry, the park, will be partly out of action for the whole of the 2012 season.
It's easy to understand why the Olympic organising committee wants Greenwich: TV money. But the only imaginable reason that the council should go so far overboard for this potential disaster is that they have been swept away by the glamour.
Running a local authority is a dull, grinding business of getting many small things right. How tempting it must be to go for the fast-food route to development, not to mention the free VIP tickets and the exciting foreign trips. But all over England, the relics of “iconic” regeneration events (remember Sheffield's World Student Games?) testify to the risks of this approach.
On the main Olympic site in Newham, there will at least be relics — though plans to house big-name teams at the main stadium seem to be coming to nought. But at Greenwich, the risk of serious damage is real, and nothing is the very best we can hope for.
Reader views (24)
Thank you for the very interesting and insightful article. As a reader of your online edition of your newspaper I can appreciate the fact of opposing views being clearly written for all.
As a U.S. citizen and a survivor of the devastation of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 I can offer the following thought. The city of New Orleans as well is full of history and its citizens are protective of our history.
Be careful of what is "remodelled" in the excitement of the coming Olympics. The true question is what happens and what interest is held to restore the proud area after the games.
- Warren, New Orleans, Louisiana United States
Thank goodness someone is providing a forum where Greenwich residents can voice their opposition to holding the Equestrian Events in Greenwich Park. We haven't spoken to anyone in Greenwich (or any where else for that matter) who is in favour of the Games being held here. We also strongly oppose the publication and delivery to our home of the "Greenwich Times" which as you pointed out in your article is a blatantly propagandist newspaper for the council it's own agenda at our expense. So where do we go from here? Is their any way to stop this event being imposed on us? One feels so powerless. Which is why it is such a relief to have our main London newspaper take up the cause. Please keep up the good work.
- M & M Feast, Greenwich, London
Thanks Andrew for your article. I am the writer of the letter to "Greenwich Time" which was printed 'against' the use of the Greenwich Park. I have written several letters which are (naturally) heavily edited before printing! The Park is too small and access ( for the proposed crowds) quite inadequate. The Equestrian Events must be moved to Windsor or Badminton. Greenwich will still have Gymnastics at the O2 and Shooting at the Woolwich Parade ground.
- Mike Hamson, Shooters Hill, SE 18
Use an Equestrian Centre.
- Jackie, surrey, Coulsdon nr, Croydon ~(unfortunately)
I live in the Greenwich borough.
To all those not concerned with the damage to the park but are only concerned with the economic benefits the 10 day even will bring to the borough, I strongly advise a visit to the cinema to watch: "The Pope's toilet". I leave the conclusion to yourselves.
- C Godinho, London, UK
As a local resident I have a wish: leave Greenwich park alone! It's one of the most beautiful parks in London.
Maybe it's time we camp protest outside the park and inform misinformed or brain washed people about what the Olympic plans tothe park actually means.
We do not need to compete with the Chinese Olympics and we don't need to beat gold medal records at the expense of nature and money that could be used elsewhere.
- C Godinho, London, UK
I am sure Greenwich is famous enought already without being puffed up by the ego's of local councillors. Greenwich is the home of 'world wide time' of Longditude and the seat of the greatest ever Naval power the world has ever seen. The Greenwich Times is a joke, paid for by local Council tax payers, to promote left wing propaganda and misinformation. I am surprised they havnt voted to knock down the statue of General Wolfe that over looks the Naval Hospital and replace it with one of Stalin.
- Bondy, london
Today's Greenwich Time has 6 pages devoted to the Olympics. More Council propaganda, this week using emotional blackmail concerning pupils in riding schools, who are looking forward to the Olympics. Fine, but why does it need risking damage to Greenwich Park and inconvenience to thousands of park users to encourage them.The British Equestrian Federation, themselves on a desperate charm offensive to save their sport, are supporting kids to take up riding. But showjumping and dressage are not exactly mass market activities.
Returning to the newspaper, presumably funded by tax payers, Greenwich Council are behaving like Beijing in suppressing any negative comment. Many of my friends have written to the editor about their concerns, but none has been printed. Instead, for 2 weeks running they printed the same positive letter. The incompetence doesn't end there. A few months ago they printed an artist's impression of the stadium shown to the north of Queen's House (i.e.outside the park walls). Because of problems with trees in the way and the archaeology of Henry VIII's tilt yard, the organisers are planning to hold the events south of Queen's House (i.e. within the park walls). But no correction has been made. As for the cross country event, there is potential for damage to the archaeology and ecology of the park but, after 3 years there is still no final design of the course nor Environmental Impact Assessment. Perhaps they're waiting for it to be too late to move the venue.
- A D'Souza, London, UK
I think the park will be a fantastic venue. As a resident who uses the park daily, I can't wait until 2012!
- Vicky, Blackheath UK
Come off it Andrew Gilligan.
As a Greenwich council tax payer I am fully supportive of the use of Greenwich Park for the equestrian events.
The TV coverage will be an excellent advert for Greenwich (as with the London Marathon).
The recent equestrian events at The Hong Kong Golf Club did not damage the ground and the golfers were back on the course within a few days. They managed to achieve this on a smaller site than Greenwich Park.
- Chris, Shooters Hill, UK
Leave Greenwich Park alone! As a child, I enjoyed walking through the Park on my way home from school every day. On a less emotional track, many fragile trees will be damaged or destroyed and after the Games, the debt and damage will be forgotten. The Park Is an irreplaceable treasure.
- Joanne, Los Angeles, USA
As one of the Royal Parks, surely Greenwich Park is outside of the remit of the local council (London Borough of Greenwich) and it is, therefore, not for Greenwich councillors to poke their noses in the trough - unless, of course, there are "exchanges" taking place between the Royal Parks Directorate and Greenwich Council. I agree with all the previous comments - hands off Greenwich Park!
- Patricia, East Kent UK
This lovely park provides pleasure to thousands of Londoners, I have seen it packed on a Summer day, this shouldn't be allowed to happen
- Roland, Bagshot
Andrew Gilligan has hit on the hitherto unfathomable reasons Greenwich Council and MP are so desperate to cling onto the Equestrian events - they want to shed their shabby attire to hobnob with the Horsey set -"From Trotsky to Trotting" should be the next Greenwich Time headline...Hmmm Mongolia - great venue!
- Susan Mcneil, Greenwich, London
How DARE the council choose the supposed glamour of hosting an Olympic event over the welfare of its residents and the park it is entrusted to protect for future generations! There simply is not enough room to host this event in Greenwich and thanks to Andrew Gilligan for writing this article. If we could get it moved to a facility that is suited to hosting the event, like Badminton, then I might not have to leave my home for the duration of the Games.
- Rebecca, Greeenwich, UK
I have lived in the borough of Greenwich for over twenty years and worked for it for eleven years. Throughout that time the ruling Labour party has been a bunch of stalinists who ignore public opinion.
The only "benefit" to Greenwich from 2012 will be the "prestige" which councillors will claim has come to the borough. At least twenty years ago they were delivering actual services, if in a thoroughly patronising way; now all they can offer is spin.
Greenwich Park is a Royal Park. Ignore the council; lobby the people who actually run it. In fact, ask Mrs Windsor if she wants her suburban garden ruined and denied to her subjects for ten months. Let's get the monarchy to stand up for the people!
- Martin, Plumstead, GB
Councils are the servants of the local population who pay them.
This council has obviously misunderstood it's remit.
The only reason to close a public park for such a long period is in time of national emergency.
- Nick, London, UK.
Greenwich Park is one of my favourite places in London. To be 'banned' for 10 months would anger me, as would the damage that would obviously be done to this ancient, historical and beautiful site. Greenwich is already on the map - their arguments seem very weak. This is from the same council that bought themselves a corporate box at the O2!
- We, Kent, UK
Usually, if a Council says something is essential or right for the time, or its time has come, or its a good change, people can be pretty confident that the opposite is true. Councils are run by elected councillors usually of very low calibre and training or with doctrinaire objectives; they are not usually run by long stay officials (who could be just as tiresome). Councillors' aims on the whole are to jump on the current fashionable bandwagon, hot rod their careers, or similar, seldom to independently research and look to the future well being of their boroughs. Mind you, us OMPs (ordinary members of the public) too often fail in our duty to familiarise ourselves with the issues and think through long term implications, let alone take telling direct action!
- Helen, Norwich, UK.
Taking away the "garden" of so many locals is a personal issue. I would welcome the formulation of a lobby group fully intent on causing maximum disruption when it is staged in the form of sit-down protests. This would be a huge international embarrassment. If this gets organised NOW, This would make the organisers think twice.
- Ian, New Cross, UK.
I find it astonishing that they could consider closing the park for 10 months just for a few days of horses jumping over fences.
It does not benefit anyone in the borough.
I used to live next to the park and walked my dogs there every day, and it is a lovely park.
I simply can't understand the mentality of the council.
- George, London, UK.
Over in east London we have lost a substantial proportion of the public football pitches on Hackney Marshes to car parking for the stadium.
We have lost mature allotments and a church. We may gain a megamosque.
This has to stop.
Hold the horse events at Badminton where facilities are already in place. Use Wembley Statium, the Millenium Stadium in Cardiff and the Stadium of Light.
We don't need all this fancy new stuff. My council tax bill gets bigger every year to pay for it all.
London couldn't afford it 2 years ago; we certainly can't afford it now.
- Cam, Essex/east London
No, no, no!
This cannot be allowed to go ahead. The only reason behind this is that Greenwich Council wishes to feed at the bottomless trough of the Olympics budget.
Why not use Burgess Park in Southwark? It has acres of flat ground and could certainly use both the money and the coverage.
- Sarahn., London, UK
Simple solution: everyone in the borough who opposes the event taking place in greenwich park should withhold their council tax for at least one month.
Vote with your wallet!
- Matt Lovell, Blackheath, London 5 minutes walk from Greenwich Park
