Morning:
11°c
THE Mayor, Boris Johnson, has been misled into backing controversial plans to hold Olympic equestrian events in Greenwich Park, internal City Hall emails leaked to the Standard reveal. The emails show Mr Johnson has dropped his objections to using the park, and to holding the shooting competition at Woolwich, after he was informed by a secret report that changing the venues would require two new mini-Olympic Villages. However, the report, by accountants KPMG, has been branded a "complete whitewash" and "simply false" after a summary of its conclusions was leaked to the Evening Standard.
The proposal to erect a 23,000-seat arena and four-mile cross-country course in Greenwich Park has caused growing opposition, with protesters saying it risks serious damage to the park, one of only four Unesco World Heritage sites in London. Olympic organisers admit that the park will be partly closed for around 10 months, ancient trees will be "pruned" and there will be no legacy.
In one leaked email, written two weeks ago, Mr Johnson writes that the KPMG review has found that "Greenwich would be the cheapest option because any out-of-London venue would require provision of a satellite village for competitors".
In fact, the 2012 Games already have eight out-of-London venues - for sailing, rowing, canoeing and mountain-biking, along with four football stadia - and none of them is being given a purpose-built satellite village. Competitors at these venues will stay in existing university halls of residence or hotels, at a fraction of the cost of the main Olympic Village - which is being built from scratch largely at public expense.
If the equestrian events stay at Greenwich and the shooting at Woolwich, around 800 riders and shooters will be accommodated at the Olympic Village. One independent property expert, Peter Bill, editor of Estates Gazette, said: "Removing the riders and shooters from the Village would save building around 150 flats and save the builders around £15 million." Other estimates put the saving as high as £50 million.
London 2012 organisers have refused to publish the KPMG review, saying it is still in progress, or even to disclose its full terms of reference, claiming they are "commercially confidential". However, the Standard has learned that KPMG made no attempt to assess the environmental or ecological impact of the horse events on Greenwich Park.
It also dismissed alternative venues, such as Windsor Great Park and Badminton, without visiting them or even speaking to the people who run them. Spokesmen for both venues confirmed they had not been approached by KPMG.
"The facilities are here and [the Games] could be here," said a spokeswoman for the Great Park's Royal Windsor Horse Show. "There is already a large all-weather showjumping arena. We put up tiered seating. The grounds go on for ever, so there is plenty of room for a cross-country course. We like to think that Royal Windsor is an iconic venue, with the castle in the background and really nice TV shots."
The Standard has also established that KPMG did not speak to any interested parties in Greenwich or Woolwich, including the local council, which supports the venues, local residents' groups, who oppose them, or the Royal Parks, which owns the park.
The Olympics Minister, Tessa Jowell, has refused to publish the estimates for venue costs made by KPMG, citing "commercial sensitivities".
Nor did KPMG make any approach to the governing bodies of the sports concerned, the British Equestrian Federation, British Shooting and Pentathlon GB. "We tried to talk to them and they did not want to talk to us," said Phil Boakes, chair of British Shooting, which opposes the use of Woolwich for the Olympic shooting events.
KPMG did visit one alternative shooting venue to Woolwich - the National Shooting Centre at Bisley, near Woking, in Surrey. But no one from British Shooting was allowed to be present during the visit, or was even told about it until afterwards.
According to Mr Johnson's email, KPMG has also dismissed Bisley as more expensive than Woolwich, citing the need for a second extra satellite village and "additional security costs". Bisley, where thousands of guns are stored, is already one of the most secure sporting venues in the country, while part of the venue at Woolwich is open common and some of the rest is a housing estate.
Mr Boakes said: "KPMG's claims about Bisley are simply false. How can it be cheaper to build a new facility from scratch at Woolwich when we have a facility at Bisley already? There are serious security and safety issues at Woolwich that haven't been resolved. It is in the middle of a built-up area and it only needs a ricochet for a bullet to stray. There is a very good reason why most shooting venues, like Bisley, are in the countryside."
According to the email, another reason given by KPMG for rejecting any change to the horse events in Greenwich is that "there would still need to be a modern pentathlon showjumping arena constructed in London". It is true that all the pentathlon's five disciplines, including showjumping, have to be completed on the same day, making a London site necessary.
However, the entire horse element of the Olympic modern pentathlon lasts just three hours over the whole two weeks of the Games - 90 minutes each for men and women - and pentathlon experts said a showjumping arena could be quickly and relatively cheaply constructed at many places in the London area. Next year's world pentathlon championship, a Grade A event equivalent to the Olympics, is being staged in the athletics stadium at Crystal Palace at a cost to the taxpayer of £660,000.
"We accepted the venue at Greenwich because it was the only option presented to us," said Peter Hart, chief executive of the national federation, Pentathlon GB. "We would be happy to consider somewhere else."
Additional security and transport costs are also given as reasons why it would be cheaper to hold the equestrian events at Greenwich. "I find it hard to understand how they could have come to this conclusion," said one Olympic expert. "Both Greenwich and any alternative venue would be stand-alone, outside the general ring of Olympic Park security. And obviously the transport costs would depend on how close the competitors' accommodation was to the venue, which is something you can only assess if you look seriously at an alternative venue."
If the equestrian went to Windsor Great Park, and shooting to Bisley, riders and shots could be accommodated in recently-built student halls of residence at Royal Holloway College in Egham, near Staines, only two miles from the park and around 10 miles from Bisley. This is closer than Greenwich is to the Olympic Village in Stratford, and on less congested roads. The Windsor area is already planned to be home to the Olympic rowing and some of the Egham blocks are already earmarked as accommodation for the rowers in 2012.
A spokesman for the college said: "We have 2,000 rooms, all of which have been dedicated to the Olympics. They are very classy for students, with double beds and ensuite bathrooms, and we could accommodate the riders and shooters easily if that was what the Olympics wanted." Unlike in the Stratford Olympic Village, no one at Egham would have to share a room.
Mr Johnson's email also says: "I have had a presentation from the cross-country designer and event manager now employed by Locog which convinced me, particularly the evidence from the experience of the cross-country course used in Hong Kong [horse venue for this year's Olympics], that the impact on [Greenwich] park from the event is likely to be acceptable."
However, the event manager, Tim Hadaway, told the Standard in August that though there had been minimal damage to the turf at Hong Kong he could "not yet judge" how the large number of ancillary buildings and facilities required by the IOC, such as stables, warm-up tracks, media, security and catering areas, could be fitted in to Greenwich Park. The park is also a more crowded and delicate environment than the venue at Hong Kong, which was a golf course with wide fairways.
Tory Assembly member Gareth Bacon described the KPMG conclusions as "disappointing" and said the claim that it would cost more to accommodate riders and shooters away from the Olympic Village "simply does not stack up". He said: "This tends to indicate that this review is actually a mechanism to justify a previously-taken decision." British Shooting's Mr Boakes said: "This review is a complete whitewash."
Mr Johnson appears to have been convinced, however, saying in one leaked email that despite having "a number of meetings to challenge the emerging conclusions from the review" he had now "come to the view that there is no basis to challenge further the review conclusions".
Michael Goldman of Nogoe, a pressure group opposed to the use of Greenwich Park, said: "The arguments against the use of the Park are environmental and ecological and the KPMG review has paid no regard to them. It seems to be seriously flawed."
A spokeswoman for London 2012 admitted that "the [KPMG] report will not include a new analysis of Greenwich as the equestrian and modern pentathlon venue. It will review the work Locog did in selecting the venue for these sports." The spokeswoman said the report had not yet been finalised and would be put to a meeting of the Olympic Board next month.
A City Hall spokesman insisted that the review was "thorough and professional" and said: "KPMG have identified a number of issues that undermine the case for moving these venues. The Mayor accepts that the savings that we were seeking are not there."
Reader views (18)
Andrew Gilligan for Prime Minister - or Mayor of London I say. The only investigative journalist I have any respect for. Any one who lives near or in the vicinity of Greenwich Park will know how difficult it is now at weekends to get anywhere near the park with the volume of traffic seeking access from all directions. It is hugely popular due to its fantastic views over Canary Wharfe and the river, the beauty of the Wren buildings and it's markets. Any one with any common sense can see that Windsor is a the better option, just as historically attractive, with more space in the park. Leave Greenwich alone.
- Patricia Vincent, bromley
For god's sake, why do we believe anything that Jowell ever say's??
The best and most logical reaction should be to put the shooting in Bisley and actually leave a legacy there and move the eventing to Windsor.
Logic and sense? Not a chance then.
- Johnw, Peterborough, Cambs
If Tessa Jowell believes that there will be "an increased interest in the sport generated by having it showcased at such an iconic venue", then she is very much mistaken. As was noted by the House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts at a hearing on 2 April 2008, "There is no clear evidence that elite sporting achievement influences people to take up sport in the long term, and ... there is no conclusive evidence that winning Olympic and Paralympic medals influences levels of participation in the community." ("Preparing for sporting success at the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games and beyond". HC 477 Published on 24 July 2008)
Around 80 per cent of Olympic medal winners went to public school, and most young people do not perceive a public school boy or girl on a horse as being a role model because that activity is seen as something that is beyond their capacity,physically but also financially.
Does Tessa Jowell not have people to brief her on the facts? Why do we have people making decisions who are ignorant of the salient facts?
- Rachel Mawhood, London, UK
Why doesn't Tessa release a redacted version?
On the BBC, MP Nick Raynsford defended (pathetically) the use of Greenwich Park on the basis that: i)people pushing other venues had commercial interests in them; and ii) experts like the BEF knew best. Would this be the same BEF that selected the Park in 2003 based on a drawing that overestimated the capacity? And what do the BEF know about ecological and archaeological matters? Now, working with the correct size, it is clear that the Park is too small. There will be huge logistical difficulties because the stables, start and finish of the x-c course are at opposite corners of the Park. Ask LOCOG how the "horse infrastructure" (too long a list to mention)will be organised. The facilities planned fall far short of FEI minimum specs. The IOC have been threatening to eject the sport since 1992 on grounds of cost. Greenwich Park was primarily picked to save money, rather than build a new stadium. Never mind impact assessments then.
Will competitors still be housed in the Village now that it has been downsized? Perhaps they'll have to camp out in their horse boxes after all, or stay with the grooms overnight in the stables.
Most spectators would prefer to have an hour's travel away from London rather than have the congestion of urban roads and packed trains. And nowhere in the equation is the disruption to local traders and Park users from months of closures; and to residents that back onto Park.
- S D'Souza, London, UK
Tessa Jowell wrote in reply to a letter from our local MP 'A legacy for the sport will also come from engagement with the local community around Woolwich and Greenwich, and an increased interest in the sport generated by having it showcased at such an iconic venue with images broadcast around the country and the world'.
How ridiculous, we need money spent on facilities now for 2012 and beyond if we have any chance of winning medals in the Olympics. We will just have to face the fact that the government does not want a legacy for shooting and they will do anything to avoid having one!
- Tony, Huntingdon, UK
As several comments have noted, the great imperative here is the iconic location and the background for the TV cameras.
They promised it in the bid book, and I've no doubt the IOC are running out of patience with all the downscaling and cancellations.
As for the concerns about damage to the wildlife & ecological balance, look what they did to the main Olympic Park. It supported an enormous diversity of wildlife, birds and flora on all the nature reserves, woodland, allotments, parkland and brownfield habitats. Almost all has been lost. I'm sure they'll have no problem spinning whatever happens to Greenwich into an 'environmental improvement'.
- Peter C, Stratford, UK
Hopefully now that the truth is out, Boris will do the decent thing and cancel the destructive event in Greenwich Park
- Nick, Hong Kong
The Olympics are the biggest white elephant of modern times-trust the UK to get lumbered with them; They are merely a television sports event and as such could be held miles from anywhere at a derelict air base or other large area suitable for television coverage-but-no-London is to have to suffer all the inconvenience and extra overcrowding of our creaking transport system and lovely Greenwich park is to be ruined. What a fiasco.
- Jon Kent, Hertford. UK
Congratulations again to Andrew Gilligan; excellent investigative journalism.
Boris Johnson, understanding as he must the need not to squander Londoners' money and heritage in these difficult times, must surely insist that the equestrian events are not held in Greenwich.
Cameron and Darling should also take an interest.
- Dermot Glynn, Blackheath, London
Oh dear, Boris makes a decision to let the horsey stuff go ahead at Greenwich, and it's somebody else's fault a Andrew?
- Prj45, London
Tell me, this "'presentation ... which convinced [Boris]'" ... omitted to mention anywhere that the turf on the Hong Kong cross-country was actually of an extremely tough type recommended for equestrian courses (paspalum and zoysia) and was grown ESPECIALLY for the 2008 Olympics over the last two years, helped of course by high temperatures and very high humidity. I am right, aren't I? In Greenwich Park, we have the usual rye grass and brown top bent which withstand some foot trampling but not equestrian traffic. Horses spread weeds because pastures and dried feeds contain large numbers of weed seeds that retain high levels of viability in horse manure which means that the Park's fragile acid grasslands, the associated wildlife, and the whole ecological balance of the Park would be destroyed. The Park is also stronghold of stag beetle - which would be swept away in any clearing up of dead wood and trees done to make the Park look pretty for the tv cameras - and a number of other threatened species.
Finally, I don't believe that the proposed arena would actually fit in Le Notre's parterre to the south of the Queen's House, without altering Le Notre's design and thus destroying the finest Baroque landscape in England. All for an infernally costly horse competition and pretty tv pictures. There will be no legacy. Really, all this typically Cool Britannia style over substance and lack of planning is an insult to the IOC and the Olympic ideal.
- Rachel Mawhood, London, UK
If there truly is a good case for maintaining the decision to hold the equestrian events in Greenwich Park, LOCOG should be willing to disclose in detail the reasons for doing so and to explain why no investigation has been carried out into other suitable (even “iconic”) venues. LOCOG's unsubstantiated assertion that all will be OK will not persuade a sceptical public and it should not persuade the Mayor either. As it is, the authorities will not even make KPMG's terms of reference available for public scrutiny, but do seem determined to make a mockery of the promise of public consultation.
- John Hine, Greenwich
No-one can be surprised at this outcome because its seemed clear all along that KMPG had been briefed to make Greenwich work, not to start with a clean sheet and see if it was justified as a selection in the first instance. What is really interesting is that Royal Windsor has finally been revealed as a contender. So far it has let other potential venues such as Hickstead take the flak levlled against critics but for some time insiders have thought that at the end of 2009 it will be decided by LOCOG that Greenwich is not suitable after all - for some spurious reasons "not apparent" at the time - and that the venue will shunt to Windsor after it has successfully staged the joint European show jumping and Dressage Championships next summer. Windsor is getting a £1million pound grant from the Lottery fund to do that. This "development" lets the horse governing bodies off the hook as then can then say Windsor is "unexpectedly available and better for transportation etc etc than Greenwich" and means that they don't have to admit they made a mess of selecting Greenwich. Has no-one else picked up on Sev de Souza's article in greenwich.co.uk which shows that when Greenwich was selected by LOCOG, they grossly over estimated its capacity by drawing it up on a plan that was incorrectly scaled?
- Peter Richards, Peckham, South London
Save taxpayers money all events MUST go to the cheapest option.
- Maggie, London
t's in it for these people who seem to defy reason and more importantly, seem hell bent on ruining Greenwich Park, for a few days of horse riding.
- Helen, norwich
The suggestion that mini Olympic villages would have to be created is the most laughable thing I've ever read. At every other major three-day event - Badminton, Burghley, European championships - all the riders including Zara Phillips camp out - by choice - in their own horse transporters that include sleeping accomodation, kithens, loos and showers as standard. I'm sure they'd prefer to do that at Greenwich too except, of course, there's no room to park them.
- Clare Fawdry, Reigate, Surrey
I am utterly persuaded by the common sense of Andrew Gilligan's case against the (ab)use of Greenwich Park for the Olympic Games. What is wrong with this picture? I can only assume that the organisers are set on using Greenwich for the magnificent backdrop it offers for television. There are cheaper and less damaging ways to ensure that this and other great London backdrops feature in the television coverage. Also, The great value of going outside of London for several events receives short shrift. The "Beijing" games made great use of several venues far afield, much to the overall PR benefit to China. Stagings in Windsor and Surrey and elsewhere will do as much if not more to promote the regeneration of Britain's world-image as the Georgian columns and lawns of the Naval Museum.
- Blackstone Coke, London
I really think the Olympics should be abolished. It's not worth ruining a wonderful World Heritage Site such as Greenwich Park. The majority of the UK don't want the Olympics. Politicians, as usual, don't listen.
- Caroline G, Essex, UK
