2012 preparation hots up
It feels like only a short time since I started this blog, but looking back to the first entry I see it was written 1114 days before the start of the London Games.
This weekend we mark 1000 days to go, so even my basic arithmetic says that's 114 more crosses on the calendar - and the countdown clock feels like it's speeding up. So this is a quick review of the progress we're making and the challenges ahead.
On Tuesday we paid our latest visit to the Olympic Park - taking one of the special buses round the building site. It's a statement of the blindingly obvious that this is the most important thing happening now: getting the construction right and keeping everything to time. The good news is that the Olympic Delivery Authority continues to impress.
There's not been much obvious change in the main stadium since I was last there in July, but there's been a transformation elsewhere.
The Aquatics Centre has its roof in place with, in its interesting design, the rest of the building to follow; the International Broadcast Centre is at full height with some of the external cladding underway; and you can see the steel frame of the Velodrome looking remarkably like the kind of place Chris Hoy will tear around in 2012.
The new park will include a 6,000 seat velodrome, which will host the indoor cycling events
Our sport planning is similarly advancing. We haven't resolved the question of where our studios are going to be based yet, but the options are narrowing down.
There are some great views from the periphery of the Olympic Park and our main job is to find somewhere in the heart of the action that supplements those.
Meanwhile, our engineers and production team are devising the technical plans for our coverage; we're monitoring the evolving timetable for the Games themselves; and we met senior members of the London Organising Committee this week to discuss how we can best deliver a sport legacy through more people taking part in physical activity across the UK.
The ´óÏó´«Ã½'s timetable for the year as a whole is also becoming clearer. We hope to be celebrating the first Diamond Jubilee since 1897 with royal events and performance in addition to the Cultural Olympiad - and there'll be landmarks across 2012 from the New Year's Eve fireworks to the lighting of the Olympic and then its journey round every part of the UK even before we get to July and the arrival of thousands of athletes and scores of world leaders for the Olympic Opening Ceremony.
There will be a series of huge stories for ´óÏó´«Ã½ News and for our teams in the Nations and Regions, and this week we brought a party of colleagues from across the UK to a meeting where we started kicking round ideas about how we make everyone feel they're sharing the experiences.
I won't go into detail here about the other working groups within the ´óÏó´«Ã½ 2012 project because they will get a post of their own as they come up with firm plans.
What they all have in common, we'd like to think, is ambition; but what we recognise too is that events of this scale are complex and require a multitude of partners working together to produce results.
Some of that work is already fizzing with energy but I've no reason yet to change what in June this year:
"the Olympics offer a great insight into the way Britain works. There are the hoped-for successes - many people in London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games (Locog) and the Olympic Delivery Authority are impressive - and there are the Quangos. In quite a lot of support areas it's not clear who's running what, and many of the initiatives around the Games have a baffling number of fingers in the pies..."
I said then that what would solve this, and remove redundant fingers, was the fact deadlines were getting closer. There are encouraging signs this is happening - as in the way the Chief Executive of the Royal Opera House, Tony Hall, is trying to sort out the Cultural Olympiad.
But if there's a resolution to be made around the 1000 day mark it should be that a sharp focus is mandatory: identifying the targets and then cracking on with delivering them. I'm sure we can do this, but it's still a big job with the number of days left down to just three figures.
I'm Roger Mosey, the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s director of London 2012. That means I'm overseeing all the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s 2012 preparations including not just sport but the Cultural Olympiad, our Olympic news and information services and everything that will bring the story of the London Games to audiences at home and abroad. I want to share here what we're planning - and debate some of the big issues. You can also follow me on .
Comment number 1.
At 29th Oct 2009, ThirdWindow wrote:Given that coverage of London 2012 is monumental and events of this scale are so complex, why make it even more complicated and expensive by moving to Salford the year before the Games begin?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 29th Oct 2009, Roger Mosey - ´óÏó´«Ã½ Director, London 2012 wrote:ThirdWindow - thanks for the question. First, the core London 2012 planning team is staying in London. Second, the coverage of 2012 is something that will involve the whole ´óÏó´«Ã½ - including many London-based departments like News as well as departments based around the rest of the Nations and Regions. And third, we want to invest in the whole of the UK rather than disproportionately in London. So the location of ´óÏó´«Ã½ Sport and other key departments is a long-term decision and one based on trying to get it right for many years ahead as well as ensuring excellent coverage in 2012.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 29th Oct 2009, RFWoodstock wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 30th Oct 2009, FairplayOldie wrote:A very positive report on progress at Stratford. It is a pity that ´óÏó´«Ã½ London takes a very pessimistic view of 2012 and when ever their Olympic Correspondant Andrian Warner appears on a programme he takes a very negative view of the whole event and just seems to whine, seeking similar view points. I would have thought London of all your Regions would be celebrating the event and whipping up enthusiasm for the Games.
On Andrian's current Blog seeking Londer's view of the Legacy aspects of the Games it is clear that the majority of viewers do not share his attitude!
I myself was born only a few miles from Stratford and now being in my eighties welcome the transformation of the area and hope I will be able to travel there in 2012 to see the end result. A new attractive park with first class sports facilities for the future arisen from a derelict industrial waste land.
Berhaps ´óÏó´«Ã½ TV could sing from the same song sheet before 2012! Lets get together and support 2012!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 30th Oct 2009, Roger Mosey - ´óÏó´«Ã½ Director, London 2012 wrote:FairplayOldie - interesting comments. But actually I don't want the ´óÏó´«Ã½ to sing from the same song sheet, because it's important we preserve the independence of our reporting. I'd expect colleagues in ´óÏó´«Ã½ News to take a robust approach to issues around the Games, and that may at times not be comfortable for the organisers or even for ourselves. But it's important we represent all opinions, much as we corporately want London 2012 to be a success in the same way as you.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 30th Oct 2009, FairplayOldie wrote:Point take. However I do not think ´óÏó´«Ã½ London should always be seeking the negatives! I must admit subsequent reorting this week on 2012, not by Adrian, has taken a much more balanced view! I hope this trend remains. Do you really think Dolly in the Bingo Hall was a true representative of the Londoner's view of the Games and btw I think I am probably older than Dolly!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 31st Oct 2009, SuperCharybdis wrote:I cannot quite reconcile Roger's response to Fairplayoldie. Yes, we do want independence of reporting but surely that does not rule out the occasional upbeat report on London's progress, particularly given the current economic downturn things do appear to be going quite well and one could argue a project of this magnitude is the sort of thing one should be doing in a recession. I read with interest the ´óÏó´«Ã½ coverage of the recent award of the 2016 games to Rio which had a focus on the economic benefits this would bring to Brazil, and yet the same organisation continually questions the benefits to both London and the UK.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 31st Oct 2009, grafix135 wrote:Will you be covering the Youth Olympics in August 2010?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)
Comment number 9.
At 31st Oct 2009, Roger Mosey - ´óÏó´«Ã½ Director, London 2012 wrote:Grafix135 - yes, there's a discussion underway about possible coverage on ´óÏó´«Ã½ platforms. Details will follow next year from ´óÏó´«Ã½ Sport.
Supercharybdis - I agree with you. There should be upbeat reporting when there's good news to tell. What I was trying to say was that I don't think there should be a single, imposed ´óÏó´«Ã½ view; and our news and sport correspondents rightly operate independently from me and the 2012 project team.
While I'm writing - interesting comments from Seb Coe today:
And if you want a slightly different take from me on 1000 Days, I've written a blog in the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s new "About Us" section: /blogs/aboutthebbc/2009/10/1000-days-and-counting.shtml
Complain about this comment (Comment number 9)
Comment number 10.
At 3rd Nov 2009, rjaggar wrote:From what you say, Mr Mosey, it appears that where supervisory authority and budgetary control are vested in one organisation e.g. ODA for construction, then all is going swimmingly.
Where 'cross-organisational co-ordination challenges' exist, to quote consultancy-speak, you are less sanguine.
Presumably it is LOCOG's job to:
i. Order streamlining to take place.
ii. Require timetables for delivery to be road-tested and stress-tested.
Conflicting egos has always been a British bete-noire.
The time to resolve those conflicts would appear to be before Lord Coe stuffs his turkey this Christmas!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 10)
Comment number 11.
At 5th Nov 2009, rjaggar wrote:Mr Mosey
The ´óÏó´«Ã½ website is running a story saying that most recent Olympic hosting cities have seen a decline in tourist business both before and after the year of hosting. It's rather sad that a European Trade Association chooses to run such a story.
Are there any obvious reasons to suppose that London will suffer similarly?
Such as:
1. Price hikes for hotels?
2. Price hikes for flights?
3. Intrusive saturation advertising annoying folks not coming for the Games?
4. Hotels carrying out essential preparations to host Olympic guests?
5. Conference organisers avoiding those times?
6. Previous cities simply not being prime tourist destinations? Sydney, Beijing, Atlanta wouldn't be the highest on my list. Barcelona might be.
It's very strange that, now all the rubbish about us not actually hosting the Games are over, we are now getting a concerted attack of reports rubbishing the potential impact.
I'd like to know why this is being done.
The benefits will be directly proportional to the appropriateness of national strategies in a wide variety of arenas, including international trade, tourism, sports marketing, relationship management and customer care. They can be very good, moderate, indifferent or downright absent depending on how LOCOG and its partners manages the whole process.
Are all these negative stories just people wanting reassurances or part of a continual hate campaign by those who should, if so, be named and shamed in the international press for a decade or more into the future??? I've got a good idea who a few of them might be. I hope I'm wrong. But I wouldn't bet on it.....
Complain about this comment (Comment number 11)
Comment number 12.
At 6th Nov 2009, Roger Mosey - ´óÏó´«Ã½ Director, London 2012 wrote:The story rjaggar refers to on the ´óÏó´«Ã½ website is here:
And you can read Visit London's response here:
Complain about this comment (Comment number 12)
Comment number 13.
At 8th Nov 2009, rjaggar wrote:Perhaps Mr Mosey, you might like to comment on insinuations in today's Mail on Sunday that the Olympic Stadium will be given away 'at taxpayers' expense' to West Ham FC after the Olympics?
Apart from the fact that all other football clubs have to pay for their stadium, for example £450m by Arsenal, thereby rendering such an activity anti-competitive, I'm sure that the vast majority of football fans who DON'T support West Ham would not want to see their taxation payments handed over to new owners of West Ham, who no doubt are waiting in the wings to get their hands on the club for a pittance and then get a stadium for a pittance also. American behaviour??
To be clear about this, I expect the AMERICAN head of the legacy committee to make it quite clear that no AMERICAN or any other future FOREIGN or UK ownership of West Ham will ever benefit from such largesse and that, if they wish to use the stadium , they can either BUY it or RENT it like any other LAW-ABIDING member of society.
And you might like Lord Coe to raise at suitable levels in society what a journalist in employment is doing suggesting otherwise. With the clear implication that he might like to spend the rest of his life writing about financial fraudsters if he continues in that vein........
Given the absolutely intolerant nature of this country for any kind of unholy, imperfect, non-Jesus-like behaviour by anyone, anywhere at any time.
Sir.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 13)