´óÏó´«Ã½

We are going to host the wrost omympics ever and I gotta say I will prob have little smile. It is a total waste of time and money for a few weeks that then has lots of costs to pull it all down. The Goverment should have use an existing stadium like Wemberly and put some money in to other sports like F1 and we could then have a F1 race to be proud of and for many many years and not just a few weeks for one year and then pull bits of it down!

The Goverment should have use an existing stadium like Wemberly and put 'some money in to other sports like F1 and we could then have a F1 race to be proud of and for many many years and not just a few weeks for one year and then pull bits of it down!'

Right, so this is the 'Wemberly' which was about 10 times over budget and you also want the government to pour millions into a glorified rich boys race which only happen 3 days every year? F1 certainly does not need funds from the government!

Adrian,

Your constant anti-Olympic agenda is incredibly tiresome; both here and on the television. Please try and report soemthing positive.

Yes Wembley was major over budget but it is built and is going to stay 100% built after it is used so would make sense to use that. Any yes F1 happens for only days a year but look at the money it brings in those 3 days and other events the F1 track would host to bring in more money and it would be year on year. Plus it would only need an investment from the goverment will the goverment be spending money on the olympics after it is over? I think yes. End of the day the London 2012 is and will be a waste of money for this country and a small percenteage would be better spent in other sports not this!

Legacy will be the vast infrastructure improvements to the East End. Just as was predicted in the Long Good friday!

The games will inspire youngsters to get involved, it would be almost impossible not to.
However, I do believe that the legacy will not be there, successive governments (national & local) will see the venues as a white elephant & won't fund the upkeep nor will they fund grass roots sport & this will fall back on local amatuer clubs.

I had my suspicions when we were making such a strong bid to host the games that there was actually an alteria motive for a select few. That being, that the significant public money that the Games would command for a matter of a few weeks could be directed into their pockets. Not only are we hugely over budget in terms of build and preparation, which is funds directed into the private sector. But now we learn once the Games has had its three weeks of fun, the Legacy Commitee won't get anywhere near the assets of any value. Smacks of the Ole' Boys Club all filling each others pockets for years before and after the Games. But we, the paying public, will have such fun for three weeks while our city is disrupted, over run with tourists and probably only be able to spectate via TV, as with any other Games from around the world.

Dear Adrian
You are right to ask whether there will be a real legacy from the London 2012 Olympics since the claims to deliver the 'greenest and most sustainable games ever' appear to lack substance in key areas.
The Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL) wrote to President Rogge of the International Olympic Committee last week urging him to investigate claims made by the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) on the London 2012 website that 'All our construction activities are carried out in accordance with our Code of Construction Practice and the Greater London Authority (GLA ) Best Practice Guidance, which sets out measures to reduce dust'.
Lord Coe set out, in a letter to CCAL in early 2008, a wonderful vision for air quality for the Games which included the adoption of these Best Practices which tackle the most hazardous emissions from non-road mobile machinery.
CCAL hears that the Best Practice Guidance has not yet been implemented by the ODA in respect of abatement devices to clean up the most hazardous vehicle emissions. This is disappointing since, without full delivery on such commitments by the ODA, valuable legacy benefits will be lost for London (and the UK) as individual construction projects instead have to be persuaded to include these measures in coming years.
Your story is sure to make interesting watching.
With best wishes.
Yours sincerely
Simon Birkett
Campaign for Clean Air in London

Maybe some additional investment in education will enable more legible, relevant and worthwhile comments on future articles?

Lets face it who really has thought that the games will produce some kind of legacy for London. Very few Olympic games, villages have been used properly since they played hosts to the games.

It won't inspire young people to play sport. If they want to play sport they will be doing that already. It might be a waste of money but lots of tourists will still be attracted to the area so at least one sector should be happy.

Maybe transport as well will have improved as well but I can't see anything else happening.

To say to put the money in things like F1 is ridiculous as that is a private sports company run by a few powerful people in which they do not want to help the arenas they already go to whilst making hundreds of millions of pounds. I still don't understand why the government have not spent more money on grass root level like building more swimming pools or sports halls.

Also in the past with the government and some councils anti competitive school sports days have ruined playing sport for being politically correct.

I do think the Olympics will be a success but not necessarily on the track or arenas.

Excuse me, for being ignorant, but, from what I see read and hear in the media, F1 should look within its self regarding funding. With the amount of money floating around in fomular 1, they could afford to build their own Island in the middle of knowhere and build their own race track and facility's. Leave Wembley stadium alone and stop knocking the London 2012 Olympics, which will create the best Olympics the world has ever witnesssed and leave a legasy for decades to come.

People are jumping to conclusions at least 4 years too early. If in 4 or 5 years time when the London Olympics has been and gone, there are no signs of what has been promised, then you can say it was a failure. What ever it costs to complete, what it will leave is far better than what is there now and formular one could ever do. For those who take part in what the Australians would call are 'sitting down sports' they should get off their backsides and support what is taking place in Stratford. Back Off.

The problem is all the different stake holders want different things. TV Viewers ultimatley decide if the Olympics are a sucess or not lets face thats billions not just a few 100,000 who will actually see the games- and that will be down to the quality of the competition.

The local resisdents want to be able to utilise to venues afterwards and want the added benefits, like transport links etc - the sort of things that effect their house prices!

Lasting legacy is really only an issue for the committee - although an advantage, these games will have no more legacy for the majority outside the few London Burroughs involved then if they were held in China again. Kids who saw Usain Bolt or Chris Hoy on TV will be as inspired by them whether the games are held in London or anywhere else.

And finally there are Londoners, I'm not talking about those in the Olympic Burroughs, but those in Barnet, Enfield, Harrow etc who are paying as much for the games as the locals - though the GLA tax and yet will get as much benefit as those living in Aberdeen. We are concerned about the cost or the only lasting legacy will be our council tax bills for the next 50 years.

If a Government or it's agencies make a commitment then it is the duty of that agency to fulfill that commitment or at least to be seen to be pulling out all the stops to try & fulfill it. How can we expect good behavior & self -respect amongst the citizens of this country if we are fed a constant stream of lies & deceitful promises from those in charge?

The eyes of the world will be on us. Do we want to be seen as a proud, liberal & independent nation deserving respect & a place at the top table of modern nations or as a second rate country riddled with lies & corruption trying in vain to hang onto the vestiges of it's long gone Imperial past?

As to Sport; there are only 2 sports events worth Government money - the World Cup & the Olympics: They are the only 2 events that most people would know who the winners were in 10 years time.

Should we invest in sport? Of course - its the health & self-respect of a good sporting nation that permeates its way into the lives of ordinary citizens to make us feel better & gain justifable respect from other nations.

It seems the legacy of this Olympic blog is woeful spelling and grammar!

Why don't we try to stay positive and back the efforts that are being made. The legacy of the Olympics will partially be down to the efforts of the British public to patronise the facilities after the games. We can all do our bit so away with the pessimism please!

I for one have no doubt we will host a great Olympics, my train to/from work passes the Olympic site and it is fantastic to see the regeneration of what was such a run down area.

I think the problem is that only Londoners will be benefit as part of the Olympic legacy when it should be a nation and not a city that does.

I must agree that to say the money could be better spent on Sports such as F1 is ridiculous, although it did make me laugh on what is otherwise a rather boring Monday

These pink elephants are gonna be hung around the taxpayers neck for years to come.

Seriously Adrian, asking 89 year old Dolly (no disrespect intended) what she is getting out of the games when, the fact is almost 5000 people are employed already and the entire area landscape is being changed forever is a ridiculous question. No it isn't for everyone but as Coe always says, it's easier to sell stuff when the shop is full. The proof will be after the greatest event on earth, prospects for an entire previously deprived community with sporting infrastructure and open park land desperately needed in the east of London.

I am still confident that the aims will be met, however, i imagine it will go massively over-budget. TJ said "We are going to host the wrost omympics ever", I do not imagine that is true, what is true is that your spelling is truely awful though.

The real legacy will be more Billions sucked out of the Regions to subsidise London.

Frankly I couldn't care less. It's the Olympics for London so it is irrelevant to the rest of the nation no matter how much they might try to market it to us.

The nation's pride & self-respect rest upon us completing the commitment.

The eyes of the world are waching & they will be the judge.

Investment at the top level will probably produce a good haul of medals again due to sports like sailing, rowing, cycling. However, after the games, budgets for various sports are going to be slashed.

This is likely to mean that all sports at "grass-roots" level are going to be the ones that suffer. This is where the legacy should be directed, getting people involved at the lowest levels to combat obseity and heart disease.

Makes me laugh about people going on about my spelling, ok it was not great but in fairness to me I was on the phone and working out prices at the same time. Makes me laugh that rather than argue people pick on things that are irrelevant to the argument. Bless nothing to argue back with I suppose.

Oh and F1 was just an example for the government to put money in to. All grass roots sport needs money but my point is all this money to be in for 3 weeks worth or sport and then pull lots of it down. Seems a waste to me.

'As to Sport; there are only 2 sports events worth Government money - the World Cup & the Olympics: They are the only 2 events that most people would know who the winners were in 10 years time.'

I think many people remember the F1 champions and who remembers the 50km Gold medal winners

As we know, most political party's say anything to get voted in at the next election only to go back on their word once they get into power. I missed most of the latest round of recent party conferences, but I did catch the bit at the tory conference regarding sport and the Olympics. Their shadow sports minster announced that should they gain power at the next election, they have been listening to Dame Kelly Holmes and would introduce a schools olympics to encourage young people to take up a sport.

After the 2012 Olympics, there will be lot of young people eager to take part in one sport or other. The 2012 Olympics was awarded to London on the basis that it would leave a legacey and facility's for our young sports people to take up a sport. Its most important that the London Olympics is successful not only for London but the whole country and fulfeels what was promissed. We all have our own axe to grind on this subject on here. But we tend to forget that its not about all of us on here, its about our childrens and their future, no matter what the costs.

A few comments on the bloggers first:

1. tj: F1 brings a lot of money to Bernie Ecclestone and the BRDC, who run Silverstone, barely turn a profit. We should support F1 inasmuch as the precision engineering companies which support it are a unique UK asset. But it's relatively small scale. As for hosting 'the worst Olympics ever', I think you are either a hateful person or extremely ignorant. Our building programme is entirely on schedule, unlike most recent sporting event builds. Why should be run the thing badly after doing so well preparing for it?
2. For those outside London who think it is not benefiting the country, I promise you, many companies have received major contracts to participate in the building programmes. Really, it's true. And I guarantee that publication of that data post-event will show that to be true. I said in 2002 on the ´óÏó´«Ã½ website that 'the British people will support the games if it is for the whole country, not for a few billionaire wide boys to get rich' and so far as I can see to date, that is what LOCOG are doing in the commissioning programme.
3. 'the legacy committee won't get anywhere near the assets of any value'. Well I assume that includes the main stadium, the Velodrome, the Media Centre, the affordable housing, the swimming pools etc etc. I'm not sure that they should: the only thing which is critical is that win-win deals for any private sector activity are put in place.

What WOULD be unacceptable:

1. Giving away the Olympic Stadium to a private individual, as happened with the Dome. That would be criminal negligence on behalf of the Mayor, the ODA and LOCOG, for which they should go to jail, and I remain 100% confident that that will not happen. On the other hand, hiring a professional contractor to manage the stadium as a venue based on a revenue share IS legitimate provided that the risk:reward ratios for both the taxpayer and the private contractor are equitable. If MPs want to resurrect their reputation, then the first thing they do in the next Parliament is to ensure proper, piercing yet constructive scrutiny of the Olympic investment and legacy......
2. If the affordable housing is 'given away' to a private landlord who sells it on for three times the price, then both the private landlord and the ODA/LOCOG officials should be imprisoned. The taxpayer has paid for that accommodation and it is either going to be sold via agents at market price over a few years OR used as affordable housing for rent long-term. End of discussion. I don't mind using a few private property developers as the targets for the Olympic shooting competition if they wish to hijack such processes.....
3. It is to be made absolutely clear to the Americans, who now seem to be easing their way into key operational roles in OUR flagship national project, that by working for London 2012 that UK national interests take precedence over US interests, with all that that implies in terms of decision-making and downstream benefits for the UK in future Olympic projects......and I trust that all British ODA/LOCOG officials realise that upon pain of accusations of treason, which is still a Tower of London offence, I believe....
4. The Media Centre, if used as a business location post-games can be run on a commercial basis but held in the public ownership if desired. Any sale must past public sector tests for suitability of sale, price achieved and long-term profits eschewed.....

I'm sure a few other unacceptable outcomes can be flagged up by other bloggers....


Now, one of the reasons why an American will have been hired to run the legacy company is that they are constitutionally more positive than the Brits. They see the big picture, they are good at setting interim goals and they manage resistance better than we do. It'll take 30 years to see whether this project is a success, not just for the East End but also for the UK as a whole. It only will be if the following are true:
i. Sustainable, organic growth projects in the business arena are promoted.
ii. International business development is short-term, medium-term and long-term.
iii. Community sports projects gear up between now and 2012 and are on full-receive mode to handle the surge of interest that may emerge. That can be planned for and must be planned for. And those projects must be designed to evolve as necessary should conditions change.....
iv. I'm very confident that the region will become a magnet for business post-2012. Great train links, access to London City airport, a swathe of modern housing and schools, not to mention sporting facilities. That'll grow steadily over 20 years, so don't plan for boom - it'll overheat and go bust.
v. Unfortunately, some people will benefit less than others. I'm afraid that happens whatever you do in life, wherever and however you do it. It's not very helpful for journalists to seek out those who don't benefit to make a story. Be balanced, please.....
vi. If I were setting targets right now, I'd be wanting the following:
a. A process for setting up new community sporting projects, along with mentoring, vetting and funding. I'd pilot 8 next year and 16 in 2011, with all those which succeed being up to speed for the start of the school year 2012/13.
b. Liaising with the Mayor to put his new cycle initiatives in place in Newham.
c. Liaising with the council to set up some new walkways around the Lea valley.
d. Putting a master plan in place for a 20 year property development plan, with break-points and contingencies depending on how well the project goes.
e. Liaising with ODA/LOCOG concerning interest expressed internationally in the potential of Stratford as a business location, thereby maximising the leverage obtained through the international planning process.
f. Liaising with the ODA/LOCOG on subsequent events to take place using the sporting facilities to help focus youngster in Newham on future sporting events which might take place in their borough (e.g. World athletics championships, swimming championships, cycling championships etc etc), to give those too young to compete in 2012 another focus to aim for.
g. Linking schools with hospitals, GP surgeries and sports clubs to promote healthy living rather than create fear about illness. Promoting learning about physiology, nutrition and health through sporting activity.....
h. Encouraging local people to set up businesses which can both benefit from 2012 but remain sustainable thereafter, with a particular focus on businesses linked to sport.

Those are just thoughts....the goal of 2012 is to get thousands of positive sets of thoughts into the melting pot....out of that will come the legacy.

It won't come from whinging about a lack of one, that's for sure!

I've lived in Stratford for a few years now and the plans look great. The area being developed has in the main been dead land so see it being utilised in a positive way is great. For youngsters in particular it will be a fantastic spectacle. The travel improvements alone will be great but from what I have seen Stratford has improved a great deal already. For sure we have endured some inconvenience while the work have gone on but most local people I have spoken to are looking forward to it with a lot of anticipation.

I think most Londoners living locally will be happy for any social housing that comes up but not many people are reelying on it despite the promises.

However, I've been to Barcelona and what has been left after the Olympics looks great. If we can hit that level then the legacy will be great just in lifting the area up. Anyone who has lived in East London for any length of time will know that any improvement will be good.

Overall the article came across as extremely negative. Its a shame. Try to be a bit more excited about the Olympics coming to Britain.

Are you sure TJ - how come Hoy won the SPOTY over Hamilton? Also I think Usain Bolt is probably better known globally than Jenson Button.

I personally do not think the infastructure will hold up , hoping transport will benefit is a pie in the sky idea , London runs on a transport system that is in need of massive regeneration and modernization , as a regualr user particualarly in East London I can assure all who think all is rosy they are well off .
Accomadation also will fall down whilst the athletes may be catered for in a modern version of a prefab housing estate - remember those if you are old enough , the visitors will be either fleeced or sleeping on the embankment as the hotel rooms in London and surrounding areas will be nowhere near adequate .
Whilst not wishing to sound doom laden as soon as London was confirmed as the bid winner my heart sank that was before the global reccesion and its consequences .The IOC has taken a punt on us and I suppose the organisers will say the reccesion forced our hand but does it inspire you knowing the world is watching us as we stage events in stadia not fit for purpose , ie Wembley for the boxing , in the old Empire pool arena which should have been knocked down when the fottball stadium was demolished but the country could not stand another stadium rebuild and the cost involved .
I am a massive sports fan but I am dreading my country making the equivelant of a school sports day in global terms .

I think that there is a danger that whilst there will be a legacy for London, there will be no legacy for local people. For example, Affordable housing is a laudable aim, but it means different things to different people. For example - the average house price in London is £260,764 however in Newham, where the Olympics will be staged, it is £199,436 and in Barking & Dagenham, it is £161,044 - i.e. almost £100,000 less than the London average.

I live in East London and have seen little evidence that the local community's needs have been taken into account. What do we get from this? Waltham Forest is lacking swimming pools with closures of the existing ones possible ahead of the biggest sporting event to hit the capital in 50 years; jobs connected to the site only seem open to those with specialist skills or of school age; local councils appear uninvolved; schools and education appear not to have connected with London 2012....and it was a north London firm that designed that awful logo at a cost of £400,000!

Patronising politicians talk about 'regenerating one of the most deprived areas in the whole of Europe' without backing those words up. It does not help when broadcasts about the Games are made from Kew Gardens in West London and spend as much time interviewing Manchester residents as local people. If the Games are about regenerating part of East London, great. If not, why lie about it?

The most likely reason for the failure of the Olympics in London, is the negative, cynical, can't do attitude of the British!

We're brilliant at presenting barriers and reasons why something won't work and terrible at presenting a good way round that barrier.

Why do you think the bloke who designed the Ipod is British, but living and working in America??? He remarked in an interview with Stephen Fry, that "an idea is such a fragile thing, that it needs nurturing and caring for, to bring it into fruition".

Other posts on this blog

Is there a flaw in the 2012 legacy pledge?(28)
Boris's olive branch in Olympic row(5)
Barking in the eye of an Olympic storm(13)
Transport questions that just won't go away(6)
IOC ready for battle with London's Mayor(6)
Money talks in heated 2012 venues squabble(9)
Don't scrimp on the Olympics(1)
Youth appeal(6)
Can the French muscle in on 2012?(8)
You can't fool the kids...(3)


Sounds like an agenda to me!

Hold em - the UK is a very negative country unfortunately. As it goes I know the priest in the link and he is heavily involved in a forum called Telco that pulls different community groups together to raise the profile of local needs. Its a shame that the reporters choose to ignore these kind of initiatives and focus on what can go wrong.

Adrian Warner - here is a challenge. Try and be positive in your next blog.

Holding cricket matches at the Olympic Stadium will sure leave a lasting legacy. 80,000 people for the 1st day of The Ashes, Twenty20 finals day and the 2019 World Cup final. There won't be the need to have 2 test matches and ODIs in London.

As a parent of children who love sport (particularly gymnastics, as it happens), I have to say that most posters are missing the point. We will be in London, seeing the greatest athletes in the world, soaking up the atmosphere and taking in events that last a lifetime. We will be in the Millenium Dome (or north Greenwich Arena as it will be re-branded) to see Beth Tweddle et al take on the world, Hyde Park for the Triathlon and anything else we can find. In the end, a legacy is not about the money. The Eiffel Tower is a folly, the Statue of Liberty provides nothing, the Pyramids are pointless. What they all share is that they are wonderful and timeless. The Olympic Games, at heart, are about dreaming. If you have forgotten what that means and can only think of your pocket, get out of the way and let the next generation cheer on those that strive for the best. London 2012 - I can't wait!

Phil Wray - great to see a positive comment! I for one can't wait to go and watch. Quite frankly I'd pay virtually anything to be a part of it; hopefully a once-in-a-lifetime experience.
It's fair to raise issues about preparations/legacy, but more to motivate those involved into ensuring they deliver on their remit and the bid promises, and not to demoralise those involved. Essentially IMO positive criticisms are fine but generalised doom-and-gloom statements are counter-productive. (If you wish to make them then fine, I'll just ignore them!)
Anyway there is the usual issue of the sporting event being in London, with all the new facilities, infrastructure and regeneration work (seemingly) benefiting a localised area. However, this should just be seen as a starting-point and/or focal point for a national project to promote sport and regenerate deprived inner-city areas. The danger is that the Olympics is seen as an end-point rather than a starting-point, which is probably the point being made (I haven't even watched the video by the way!).
The Olympics is, and always should be, the pinnacle of sporting events; and from what I've seen, London 2012 is set to do it justice. There might not be significant long-term benefits for many outside London, but I for one am proud that we'll host it in my lifetime, and think it'll prove money well spent. I hope I'm right!

I would much rather spend public money on the Olympic Games rather than bail out the banks, but that's another story!

I wish more people would get behind the efforts of the people who are doing something positive by making the 2012 Olympic Games a reality.

Without a doubt the construction sector would be very much worse without the Games, but shame on Boris for going to the USA to publicise construction opportunities!

It's supposedly g.b. games so it's obvious we'll only get cricket games there.is it not supposed to get built for athletics;what a legacy if we only get pro. cricket or pro. football

Yet another negative report! Some posters ask why do Americans keep getting these jobs? Because they take an attitude 'Can do' not 'Cannot do'!
No reports on your Blog with progress being on time and mainly within budget. I see no mention of the completion of removing 85 pylons from the site , a lasting legacy! Would not have been done without the 2012 Budget! 4500 apartments under construction in Stratford, where else in the country is house building being carried out on the scale at present. Are they all going to be knocked down after 2012?
As I mentioned in my earlier comment, some months ago, I know the area very well having been born only a few miles away. The future Olympic Park will transform the area with its waterways and tree planting a true legacy for all East Enders!
I myself am over eighty and I do not think your selection of interviewers was appropriate, you certainly went out your way to select your candidates! I know myself I am looking forward to seeing it all complete in 2012, if I can make it to Stratford!
As soon as I hear your voice on ´óÏó´«Ã½ London I know there wioll be a whine!
As for Formula, no comment! What a lovely legacy for East London, although I am a keen follower of the sport.

I am saddened that this 'correspondent' continually feels the need to voice concerns over every aspect of the games. It is unfortunately indicative of the carping attitude far too prevalent in this country. Surely if he does indeed have an agenda (which seems possible given previous blogs by this correspondent) shouldn't the powers that be look at replacing him for another correspondent with a slightly more balanced views of things?

'End of the day the London 2012 is and will be a waste of money for this country and a small percenteage would be better spent in other sports not this!'

The truth is that in a recession, the huge building programme for the Olympic games has been a massive shot in the arm for the UK construction industry and employs hundreds of contruction workers and associated workes. It was not intended to be. Spending public money on building projects is one way to help in a recession and regardless of what happens during the game, building the Olympic infrastructure is an unexpected benefit to the British economy.

'I think many people remember the F1 champions and who remembers the 50km Gold medal winners'

Why choose a random event... actually is there a 50k whatever in the games??!!

Yes people remember the F1 champions but then everyone tends to remember who win the Olympic 100m. And various nations make legends out of their Olympians.

In the UK the likes of Seb Coe, Daley Thompson, Kelly Holmes, Steve Redgrave come to mind and beyond these shores Jessie Owens, Carl Lewis, Mark Spitz, Natalia Commonechie, Michael Phelps and Michael Johnson are just a few that come to mind.

I was going to write a long post about negativity, prejudice and general journalistic carping but, you know what, it's so prevalent these days, I really can't see the point. I know I'm going to enjoy having the Olympics in London. I know the British media is going to whinge and moan and probably make quite a lot of people think it was an expensive failure. I will be pleasantly surprised if I see some honest, objective, balanced reporting about the buildup, event and aftermath. I don't hold out much hope. Other nations must think we are the most hopeless people in the world, they really must.
xJess

I'm a firm believer in positives overcoming the negatives. If any team or individual sports person goes on a run of bad results, then they will become negative in their thoughts and continue to perform badly. Lets look at what we had before we won the bid to host the 2012 London Olympics.

In sport, we already run and host the most successful football league in the world with the Premiership, we already host the biggest and most famous full marathon and half marathon in the world in London and Newcastle, we already host the most famous tennis tournament in the world at Wimbledon, And that's just for starters, there's Twicker's for the rugby, Lords for the cricket, we now have the Dome (02) for the gymnastics, there's Aintree for the Grand National and yes, we have Wembley for the football and other majer sporting events. And that's just in England. The Welsh have their National stadium, the Scots and Irish have theirs.

With all those positve world famous venues and events already in place, we should be feeling positive that we can and that will build the best sporting venues and host the best Olympics the world has ever seen. We have done it before in what we already have and I can see no reason why we cant do it again. If you think negative it will never happen. Those with the negative thoughts should go and live in the North Pole for the next five years and come back when they get bored because you have nothing to criticize.

Olmypic motives are all political. London 2012 will once again announce Britain on the world stage as a diverse, multicultural nation which has the ability to once again become a world leader. If London 2012 leaves a legacy, it wont be that millions of children are inspired to become athletes. It will happen to an extent, of course, and since we finished that fantastic 4th in Beijing, I know that many youngsters have started competing in sports, in particular sports which we excel at such as rowing and cycling. The legacy which our Games will leave us with is a developed east end of London.

I have no problem with this. To me, the Olympics are designed to bring the world together and instil pride in a nation, like with the Aussies in 2000 and the Koreans in 1988. The argument that we should be putting our cash into other sports is just plain stupid - do you really think that F1 is underfunded? Fantastic spectator sport, but we already have a world class circuit in Silverstone, if plans for Donington fall through. Wembley and the Millenium Stadium are fantastic facilities, and the Olympic Stadium will provide our country finally with a world-class athletics stadium. I dont think our Olympics will be as good as Beijing, just because its on a smaller budget. But whatever we produce will be something to be proud of for generations to come

Remember the Sporting Giants campaign started back in 2007 launched by Sir Steve Redgrave? Well the Beach Volleyball program element of that, amongst others, had its funding severley reduced earlier this year. So the development element, i.e. the Sporting Giants talent identification, suffered dramatically. The talent spotted were effectively dropped by the GB squad and left to their own devices with their main funding coming from the TASS program. This year it stands to get even worse with even that funding not having been confirmed yet. So as a parent of one of the squad I am now looking at filling last years £500/month shortfall as well as having to cover the costs of gym membership, physio, coaching, tournament entry and expenses, the list goes on. Those athletes have given up a lot, placed their futures on hold, including their university education, by becoming full time athletes with the promise of great things and support and are now very demoralised and some thinking of giving it all up. I'm afraid it's not just the credit crunch effect, its a lack of commitment and not delivering promises that is unfortunately a sad indictment of the support the so called minor sports get.

Adrian,

May I ask if you have ever read the Governments Public Service Agreement 22 (PSA 22)?
Or indeed if you have read the 'Physical Education and Sport Strategy for Young People' (PESSYP)?

Have you ever met and interviewed any of the thousands of people employed in and around School Sport Partnerships?

Any of the 225 Competition Managers developing, improving and modernising inter-school competition across England?

Perhaps an interview with some of the newly employed School Sport Coaches who will be delivering nearly 7,000 hours of extra sport to young people in extra curricular sessions?

There is a legacy that is being built and I appreciate that you did reference the part about the kids... Even though they were the somewhat blinkered views of John Amaechi.

My challenge to you Sir is to blog on some of the fantastic changes that are happening for children and young people all over the country... The puplic deserve to know! Perhaps an interview with Baroness Campbell would be a nice start?!

Go on... I dare you!!!

I do think it is a journalist's progative to always look at the negatives, particularly in the build up to an Olympics.

Athens was completely panned in the build-up to 2004 and Beijing was hit hard by stories on human rights and pollution.

Both games survived.

What I would add though is that when they did bid for the games London did make a lot of big ideological promises in order to get the olympics from Paris' grip. They have set themselves impossibly high tasks to reach and it would be a miracle if most of them were kept.

unounos wrote:

I do think it is a journalist's progative to always look at the negatives, particularly in the build up to an Olympics.

Why is it a journalist' progative to ALWAYS look at negatives, particularly in the build up to the Olympics? I would have thought that it would be a journalist's aim to present a balanced point of view particularly on such a major project as the Olympics.
I note from that over 40 comments have been receieved to this item so far, the greatest for any item on this Blog, 29 think that the Games will meet the Legacy Pledge and only 12 support the negative! I would be interested to know of those taking a negative view actually have first hand knowlege of the Stratford area over the past 40 years?
I think the ´óÏó´«Ã½ London should play fair and have a much more unbiased individual as their Olympics Correspondance!

In the UK the likes of Seb Coe, Daley Thompson, Kelly Holmes, Steve Redgrave come to mind and beyond these shores Jessie Owens, Carl Lewis, Mark Spitz, Natalia Commonechie, Michael Phelps and Michael Johnson are just a few that come to mind.

Who????

You obviously have no idea about sport then!

I wonder if the ´óÏó´«Ã½ could arrange to split this forum in two. One for the positives and one for the negatives. Then in ten years time we can all meet back here to see who was right or was wrong. Please can you put me in the positives forum.

Put the arguments for the positives in gardening terms. If you want to grow a bed of flowers, you need to plant it in the best part of the garden where it will get plent of sunshine. Before planting the flowers you need to clear the part of the garden where the flowers are to be planted, dig it over and put down fresh earth with furtaliser mixed in to help the flowers grow. Then plant the bulbs well spaced out so they have a better chance of flowering without being overcrowded. Once the bulbs are in, water them regularly and you will soon have a flower bed to be proud of.

All this talk of things not being ready, being over budget and not seeing any improvements yet. For gods sake give them a chance. There's three years to go yet and most of the site is nearly done. The ground was chosen and has been cleared. The plants are in and things are being put in place to make them grow. Things are being done to make the site look even better. As soon as the site is finished there will be plenty of time to improve the envirament, make things better for the locals, finish improving the transport system and put the finish and touch's.

From the flourishing flower bed you can then take cuttings to plant more flower beds in other parts of England, Wales, Scotland and Northan Islland. The whole UK will benefit once the first flower bed is in place and flowering. But you have to start somewhere. London was chosen as the place to start. From what I've seen with my own eyes there is no need to be negative, just give the organisers, builders and yes the gardeners the time to get the main part done first. My only worry is Borris, but you can have everything.

It will be a fantastic Olympics, regardless of what 'your man on the street' is saying now because the media in London tells him what to think, the minute the torch is lit and the Games start, every single person in this country will be captivated. We will do the Olympics well and up and down the country right now initiatives are underway to make sure that the whole country is involved in some way shape or form.

The Olympics will undoubtedly increase participation, young people in the UK will and should be encouraged to have a go at this that and the other. Whether this can be sustained or not is yet to be seen but there are a multitude of bodies in place to ensure that the Olympics is not just a two week party.

The ridiculous argument that only London will benefit is tiresome, organisations, businesses and individuals up and down the country will benefit from tourism, contracts, volunteering, education and simply being inspired by what they're watching. It's not just about London!

In terms of legacy there's so many positive things you can talk about, why this reporter has to bleet on about the negatives is a little bewildering. Surely the Olympic correspondant for ´óÏó´«Ã½ London should be someone who can actually enthuse people about the Games not turn them against it.

As for the Olympic Park itself, it will be a fantastic facility and there's no doubt that having world class facilities have a long-term affect. You only have to look at the Velodrome in Manchester and map the time it took British Cycling to absolutely dominate the sport. In the same respect having first class facilities in East London will only help to develop even more champions in even more sports.

The Olympic Village and what happens to it will be integral to the legacy of the Games and we would all hope that the authorities do the right thing with regards to the sell off of this asset. However, the legacy of the Games is so much more than this and it's incredibly misleading to continually report on what might go wrong rather than what is clearly already going right!

Adrian, a very simple request from me, fill your glass up mate, it's been half empty for a little too long.

I think the problem with Olympic bids now, and especially in a country such as ours where people actually still believe that decisions are actually made with the public in mind, is that they pretend to be everything to everyone.
Look at 2012: it will provide jobs before AND after the games, it will encourage MILLIONS to take up sport, it will showcase London and its wonderful peaceful multicultural lifestyle, it will NOT return a debt!

I have news for you all!

The aim of the games is NOT to achieve these things, but to make MONEY!
For the key to the games, look to the contracts for building, advertising, sports training, schools schemes, public transport, hoteliery, catering, merchandise and a thousand other areas of commerce.
There are a thousand companies which stand to gain from this games, and not one of them will have signed up for commitments which keep them committed for very long after the games have finished.

It may not be a white elephant in the best sense of the expression, but just like the '(O2) dome' nine years ago you can be sure that whoever picks up the pieces after the games have gone will get an incredible deal to 'save' the project.

Lastly, let's not forget that the party that delivered these games to us will be long gone by the time they start, and, given that a party's longest ever period in office is 15 years, they would had to have been pretty sure that they would have been voted out by now, then we can be sure that they knew they wouldn't be around to pay for the aftermath of the games anyway.

Despite all this, it would actually be totally out of character for London NOT to host the games for these purposes. London is a city built on commerce, and has been for 2000 years so it is just doing what it does best really so lets not all get too worked up about eh?

Greg