Adding further pressure to the already out of control London Olympics budget (currently standing at £12BN, including £2BN running costs); Tessa Jowell revealed that the bill for policing London and the United Kingdom during the Games had soared from £200M, at the time of the 2005 bid, to a total of £1.2BN.
Denis Oswald, the chairman of the IOC's London 2012 co-ordination commission, said that he was "encouraged" by the latest budget analysis announced by Jowell.
LOL!
Wednesday, 12 December 2007
Monday, 10 December 2007
Quell Surprise!
It should come as no surprise to learn that the costs for the out of control London 2012 Olympics (the budget currently stands at £12BN, including £2BN running costs) have a 20% chance of rising.
Only 20%?
That is the warning given by a government report which has been leaked to the BBC.
However, please do not be alarmed. Our government has issued an assurance that ministers are confident the budget is "robust".
HAH!
They would say that, wouldn't they?
Never allow a politician to run a long term prestige project. They have neither the skill, nor the attention span, to do an effective or reliable job.
Only 20%?
That is the warning given by a government report which has been leaked to the BBC.
However, please do not be alarmed. Our government has issued an assurance that ministers are confident the budget is "robust".
HAH!
They would say that, wouldn't they?
Never allow a politician to run a long term prestige project. They have neither the skill, nor the attention span, to do an effective or reliable job.
Friday, 7 December 2007
Emergency Funding
In a sure sign the the budget for the London Olympics 2012 is well and truly out of control, and the organisers are panicking, Olympics officials have not ruled out having to spend all of the £2.7BN.
This was set aside to pay for cost overruns on the London 2012 Games.
David Higgins, chief executive of the Olympic Delivery Authority told the Department for Culture, Media and Sport committee the contingency is "prudent".
He said the authority does not intend to ask for extra funds.
Until, of course, he needs them.
They know full well that they have the government by the balls on this, and there is no way that the politicians will be involved with a "failed" Olympics.
Such a pity that it is the taxpayers' money that is being used to prop up the failed careers of second rate politicians.
The budget currently stands at £12BN (including £2BN running costs), we can be assured that the final figure will be much higher.
This was set aside to pay for cost overruns on the London 2012 Games.
David Higgins, chief executive of the Olympic Delivery Authority told the Department for Culture, Media and Sport committee the contingency is "prudent".
He said the authority does not intend to ask for extra funds.
Until, of course, he needs them.
They know full well that they have the government by the balls on this, and there is no way that the politicians will be involved with a "failed" Olympics.
Such a pity that it is the taxpayers' money that is being used to prop up the failed careers of second rate politicians.
The budget currently stands at £12BN (including £2BN running costs), we can be assured that the final figure will be much higher.
Tuesday, 4 December 2007
IOC President Lambasts London Olympics Budget
The chickens are well and truly coming home to roost for the government and the organisers of the London 2012 Olympics, over the spiralling and out of control budget (currently £12BN including running costs) for these unwanted games.
Jacques Rogge, President of the IOC, has put the boot in by saying that the government handling of the budget review had imperilled public support.
Rogge, being a true politician, tries to pour oil on troubled waters by noting that much of the increase can be accounted for by the fact that 2004 prices were used in the bid and VAT was ignored.
Disregarding that spin, he then notes that the huge increase in the headline figure has led to public uncertainty.
He is quoted in The Guardian:
"There are two issues that have made things confusing for the general public because they were not included in the original budget.
These are elements that have been added to the budget. They are VAT, which was not included at the beginning, and the second is a strong contingency fund, all of which gives the idea to the general public that there has been an escalation. In fact these are new elements.
Another issue is that in the bid books we had 2004 prices, but we are speaking about a project that will culminate in 2012 ... and that creates confusion among the general public who think that the budget has exploded.
There is a perception that there is a big difference but if you look at the constant impact of inflation it's not such an explosion."
Whatever political spin is put on the £12BN cost figure that the taxpayers are now facing, can't hide the fact that £12BN is a very large sum of money (one which will rise as the deadline draws ever closer) and that one that the British taxpayer does not want to fund.
The organisers by their ineptitude and spin tried to hide the true cost of the games when they made the bid, as they knew that the public would never have supported them.
The chickens are well and truly coming home to roost, and the politicians are finding it more difficult to hide the true costs of the games.
Jacques Rogge, President of the IOC, has put the boot in by saying that the government handling of the budget review had imperilled public support.
Rogge, being a true politician, tries to pour oil on troubled waters by noting that much of the increase can be accounted for by the fact that 2004 prices were used in the bid and VAT was ignored.
Disregarding that spin, he then notes that the huge increase in the headline figure has led to public uncertainty.
He is quoted in The Guardian:
"There are two issues that have made things confusing for the general public because they were not included in the original budget.
These are elements that have been added to the budget. They are VAT, which was not included at the beginning, and the second is a strong contingency fund, all of which gives the idea to the general public that there has been an escalation. In fact these are new elements.
Another issue is that in the bid books we had 2004 prices, but we are speaking about a project that will culminate in 2012 ... and that creates confusion among the general public who think that the budget has exploded.
There is a perception that there is a big difference but if you look at the constant impact of inflation it's not such an explosion."
Whatever political spin is put on the £12BN cost figure that the taxpayers are now facing, can't hide the fact that £12BN is a very large sum of money (one which will rise as the deadline draws ever closer) and that one that the British taxpayer does not want to fund.
The organisers by their ineptitude and spin tried to hide the true cost of the games when they made the bid, as they knew that the public would never have supported them.
The chickens are well and truly coming home to roost, and the politicians are finding it more difficult to hide the true costs of the games.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)