Tonight:
4°c
Kate Hoey attacks choice of 2012 shooting venue in Woolwich
Matthew Beard, Sports News Correspondent20 Mar 2009
A decision to keep the Olympic shooting venue at Woolwich barracks was today attacked by Kate Hoey, the London Mayor's commissioner for sport.
Ms Hoey said the Olympic board did not act in the interests of sport by rejecting the National Shooting Centre in Bisley, Surrey.
National shooting federations opposed Woolwich because, as a temporary venue, it would leave no legacy for their sport.
But the Olympic board rejected Bisley after a six-month cost analysis. Consultants for British Shooting said adapting Bisley would cost £32million, but the 2012 organising committee decided it would turn out to be more expensive than the £42million cost of Woolwich.
Reader views (19)
Can I suggest that you all write to your M.P. and ask him/her to explain why he and his colleagues are wasting our money in this way?
I would have thought by now some enterprising Journo would have rooted out the source of the smell???
- Mark Bridger, Cadnam Hants, 16/01/2011 15:09
Report abuse
I cannot see for the life of me why they haven't given Bisley a second thought? It would seem to me that anyone who does shoot, would want to go to the home of shooting in England ... This is Bisley ... Anyway, cannot see how anyone could complain about the distance from the venue when the sailing is in Weymouth and the rowing is at Dorney Lakes (only some 25 miles from Bisley). Well done team.
- Chris Jewell, Reading, Berkshire, 21/07/2009 16:04
Report abuse
And rightly so these are the London Olympics not the Surrey Olympics. I don't see why I should have to pay extra council tax for a lasting legacy n Surrey.
- Janine, London, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
Particularly spiteful attitude Janine - you would prefer to see a 42 million project bulldozed after the event rather than leaving a legacy a few miles down the road
- Paul, London, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
Surprising that the body Olympic can withstand the leeches.
- Wills, Soton, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
Yes probably was a bit spiteful just feeling a bit jaded about the whole Olympics thing and to be honest just annoyed about paying extra council tax towards the Olympics - there are a lot better things to be spending taxes on. If it really is cheaper in Bisley then it should go there. I am a bit suspicious of the reporting though if it really is 10 million less than why have the committee said it is not cost effective?
Happy to go for the cheapest option!
- Janine, London, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
These consultants who said that spending £32 million on Bisley the home of shooting would cost more than £42 million on Woolwich the home of the ferry, dont work for Royal Bank of Scotland by any chance.
- Mr S.Port, London, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
This analysis is utterly flawed!
It beggars belief that a 32 million spent on Bisley would be more expensive than Woolwich at 42 million. The fact is the total 42 miilion spent at Woolwich would be down the drain after the Olympics, the 32 million spent on Bisley would still be intact after the Olympics and provide a huge boost to the standards of UK shooting facilities.
Ah now I get it! This is really just another nasty little Left pile of cretins trying to deny shooting as much as they can. The fact is shooting sports win gold medals despite the moronic draconian British gun laws which have seen [banned] handgun crime rocket. These unelected morons blowing billions of taxpayers money and playing to their smug Left Wing PC agendas. Disgusting.
- James Macleod Ritchie, Oyster Bay Cove, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
Another respondent stated that "these are the London Olympics, not the Surrey Olympics". I wonder how she squares that view with the fact that the sailing events will be held at Weymouth and Portland in Dorset?
The Dorset Olympics?
- Tony, Aylesbury, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
Another flawed decision by a government bankrupt of ideas and drowning in blinkered bigotry against country sports and shooting in particular.
Most of us knew this would be the outcome from the outset; it suited the current cretinous mob too busy finding more troughs to immmerse their collective snouts in than look for value for the people of this country.
Londoners can feel particularly embittered; paying for many years, for an 'iconic backrdop' for a fortnight or so, with millions spent and no legacy: what waste (and against the Olympic Charter).
But, thats Labour thinking; always was, always will be.
Richard from Worcester
- Richard Atkins, Worcester. England, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
Bisley is used to holding world class events. The costing published is a joke! For the money to knock down Woolwich,Bisley could be tip top and a legacy would be left!
The Olympic board do not have a grip on financial reality. You could almost believe the Banks were in charge!
- John Pitts, Brighton, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
Why does everyone justify enormous spending with last legacy of Olympics.
The only lasting legacy will be white elephant stadiums and ENORMOUS BILLS WHICH WILL TAKE LONDONERS DECADES TO PAY>
- Alan Green, Woodford Green, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
There is a Shooting range inside the M25 at Dartford Kent. Not far from the Olympic site and good travel network. This Shooting range have a rich history with regular winners in the past that needs its facilities up dating and to to be used after the olmypics have gone. Why have the olympic commitee overlooked this ?
- Joe, Swanley Kent, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
Erm, I pay my council tax in London for the London 2012 Olympics, so why should the shooting move to Surrey and not stay in London? Sailing and the requirements to have an ocean/sea are slightly different, although if we are going down this line then lets spend another few billion creating a water tank in London. The whole thing is a waste of money, is anyone else seeing shades of the Millenium Dome in this whole affair.
Plus if you move it to Surrey people who have come over here are not going to want to spend £100 or what ever network rail will charge to get there in 2012.
As for going on about the Labour Gov not caring about shooting, I don't think they care about anything very much, inparticular anyone who lives in Britain and their opinion, jobs, education, healthcare...... Surely when we can get these little things sorted then we can start on getting shooting and other sports up to scratch.
Nevermind, lets look on the bright side, all the shooting campaigners can be positive and start a club in Woolwich to invest in the local community, and when they get there will run back to leafy Surrey in 5 minutes flat!
- C Robertson, Woolwich London, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
It is pretty obvious to me that the way the money is being wasted, it is not coming out of Sebastian Coe's pocket.
When I last looked at the numbers, somewhere between one quarter and one third of the cost of using Woolwich for the shooting events was for knocking it all down afterwards!
I have even seen numbers quoted that, dishonestly, did not include that cost.
There is very little doubt in my mind that the organisers are determined that there will be no legacy for the Shooting Sports.
- Terry, Hampshire, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
This decision goes against every shred of credibility. No legacy and a huge bill, as against a lower cost and a great legacy for a sport which has a good and successful following.
So much for all the legacy hype.
- John Whitby, Peterborough, Cambs, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
Let's withdraw from the Olympics and let Paris host it.
- Mark, London, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
The 1948 Olympics and The Commonwealth Games were held at Bisley.
- Bernard Parke, GUILDFORD, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
Tessa Jowell, Sebastian Coe and their merry men & women strike again!
What really were the chances of common sense prevailing on this occasion?
Residence of Bisley, feel re-assured in the knowledge that Bisley, Surrey will not be involved in this fiasco any further!
When will this Olympic band-wagon halt?
Can I use this opportunity to suggest the following classic for the London Olympic games:
No income tax, no VAT, no money back & no guarantees….
- Andre, Bisley, 21/07/2009 15:04
Report abuse
