Morning:
8°c
Comment: Here's what the Games will do for us
Tessa Jowell, Olympics Minister8 Jul 2008
Do you remember that Monty Python scene from The Life Of Brian asking what the Romans ever did for us? There was sanitation, public health, irrigation, education, the roads - and so the list went on, but it was never enough.
I sometimes think that substituting Olympics for Romans sums up the argument of some of the more vocal critics of London 2012. What will the Olympics ever do for us? Apart from jobs, homes, billions of pounds of business and tourism, world-class sports facilities, and so on.
In all seriousness, I have no problem with the debate about 2012 that features so heavily in the Evening Standard. But it needs to be based on facts, not urban myths.
Perhaps the biggest is that the cost of the Games is £9.3 billion. Wrong. That is the maximum set aside to deliver both the world's biggest sporting event and Europe's biggest regeneration project, because what we are talking about is much more than a few weeks of sport. London 2012 will transform one of the most deprived parts of the capital, with 75p out of every pound in the Olympic Delivery Authority's budget for regeneration. So what does this mean in real terms? Aside from building five international sporting venues, their conversion for use after 2012, and a 17,000-capacity Olympic village, it means the regeneration of a 500-acre urban park, restoring eight kilometres of waterways, and cleaning and removing one million cubic metres of soil.
It means 9,000 homes built and 120,000 square metres for business, in what will be the media centres during the Games. It means eliminating 52 pylons from the skyline and replacing them with 12 km of tunnels housing 200km of power cables.
But it is not just the public sector contributing. An estimated £7 billion of private investment is coming into Stratford City, the Olympic Village, the media centres and utilities serving the Lower Lea Valley - and of course almost all the £2 billion budget of Locog, the Games organising committee, is privately financed.
The Standard's Andrew Gilligan lambasts the Games as a "five-ring circus" that provides moments of pride and ecstasy but leaves almost all host cities either no better off or worse off. In the case of London 2012, this notion is woefully out of date.
Will transforming the skyline of our capital be a fleeting memory? Or a legacy of new sports facilities so badly needed in London? Or the creation of thousands of new homes and jobs? Not a chance. We need to recognise the achievements - such as underground tunnels completed on time and on budget, or construction starting on the Olympic Stadium three months early. This is progress so strong that the International Olympic Committee gave London an almost perfect 9.75 marks out of 10 for our record so far.
We bid for the Games because we wanted regeneration - but the Games are also the greatest opportunity we will have to inspire young people to take up sport. Older Londoners will be the first to benefit from free swimming in the capital's pools. And young and old will be able to use facilities left after 2012, like the aquatic centre - the very ones some of our critics want London to forsake.
One reason I believe public support remains so high, in the face of media scepticism, is because parents grasp the benefits the Games will bring. I know that there has been a lot of understandable concern about the budget. But let no one be in any doubt: there is no more money for 2012. The Mayor has made clear there will be no more from council-tax payers and the Government is well aware there is no public appetite for more contributions from the Lottery or the Exchequer.
I never stop reiterating this to our partners building and staging the Games. So if costs go up unavoidably in any part of the project, we will cut our cloth accordingly or make savings elsewhere to stay within the £9.3 billion budget. But the size of our ambition remains the same. We could scale down the Games, but London would be the loser. We could choose an austerity Olympics, but it would be at the expense of the Legacy Games we are determined 2012 will be. That would be the worst type of short-term thinking - and a mistake we would live to regret.
• Tessa Jowell will be speaking at tonight's Evening Standard debate - Will the Olympics be good for London? - at the RSA in John Adam Street WC2 at 7pm. The panel includes Kate Hoey, Andrew Gilligan, Lord Coe and Will Self. Some remaining tickets may be available at the door.
Reader views (1)
2012 a perfectly competitive market and surely 'll This will definitely be a tremendous movement towards an equilibrium. Can't wait.
Your's truly
- Haja Allie, Greater London, 10/07/2008 13:37
Report abuse
