Afternoon:
10°c
'Too many bean-counters working on the Olympics'
Matthew Beard, Sports News Correspondent17 Oct 2008
OLYMPICS chiefs are accused of "staggering" excess as it emerged that nearly 1,000 people are administrating the 2012 project most at taxpayers' expense.
Data from answers to Parliamentary Questions shows 11 Whitehall departments and 14 government agencies employ staff dedicated to the Games. In some cases their fees are not included in the £9.3billion budget.
Research by the Liberal Democrats highlighted concerns over the Government Olympic Executive with a staff of 72 and an annual budget of £4.7million within the Department of Culture, Media and Sport. The executive's director general Jeremy Beeton is paid £220,000 plus a bonus, and finance director David Goldstone has an annual salary of £180,000. The Olympic Security Directorate mainly Met officers, emergency services and Home Office civil servants has 111 staff. The London Development Agency has 88 staff working on Olympic legacy.
Liberal Democrat sports spokesman Don Foster said there appeared to be too many "bean-counters". He added: "These numbers are staggering. To have so many overseeing preparations for the Games seems totally over the top, and this is before we've taken into account the work contracted out to private consultants.
"I dread to think what the collective cost is to the taxpayer."
Parliamentary written answers in recent months show there are almost 800 dedicated 2012 workers paid out of public funds. This number includes 126 from Whitehall departments, 237 from government agencies and a further 212 employed by the Olympic Delivery Authority.
The ODA has also paid £87million to the CLM consultancy for financial work on the Games. CLM has a team of about 200.
The self-funding organising committee, Locog, has 175 staff, bringing the total to nearly 1,000.
A spokesman at the Culture Department said: "This is a multi-billion pound project using very substantial amounts of public money to stage the world's biggest sporting event and leave a legacy.
"It is important we have our own experts in place to ensure value-for-money. It is wrong to suggest there is duplication of work."
Reader views (2)
What's more, they have been offered Hickstead free! How can that possibly be more expensive than putting it into Greenwich and then taking it away again?
- Penny Aldred, London, UK, 24/10/2008 15:15
Report abuse
One obvious saving to make would be to move the equestrian events from Greenwich to Badminton, Hicksted or another site already set up for events of this kind, as suggested by the editor of the Times. There would then be a positive legacy of enhanced facilities for the sport - whereas in Greenwich the facilities would all have to be cleared away and the legacy would be simply damage to the beautiful historic park, and resentment. And probably at least £15 million would be saved.
- Dermot Glynn, London, UK., 21/10/2008 10:51
Report abuse
