Ken Livingstone, mayor of London, intends to preside over the opening of the 2012 Olympics.
This promise requires quite a leap of faith, as he is currently standing for re-election and even if he wins, his term of office will expire in Spring 2012. In order to open the August 2012 games, he would need to win this year's election and the one in 2012.
He also claims that the Olympics will be ready well ahead of time, and are on course to come in at least £1BN below the £9.3BN budget.
Well that's alright then!
Don't forget though, that this is man who promised not to raise the congestion charge at the last election; as soon as he won, he promptly raised the congestion charge.
Monday, 28 January 2008
Thursday, 24 January 2008
Immigrant Ban To Be Lifted
It seems that, in its blind infatuation with the Olympics, the government is thinking of lifting the ban on non-EU unskilled workers being allowed to work in the UK in order that the preparations for the London 2012 Olympics meet their deadline.
Head of the new Migration Advisory Council (MAC), Professor David Metcalf, has told a committee of peers that the situation of UK immigration may have to change if there are labour shortages brought on by the Olympics.
Quote:
"One would certainly want to see whether or not it could be sensibly filled by British employers. The worry I think one has about this, is the inevitable tension between the short run and the long run. If you talk about the Olympics having to be on-stream by 2012 and therefore the facilities having to be built by 2011, a modern apprenticeship is three years."
Under the point-based system for migrants, which will be introduced soon, workers who are considered unskilled and come from outside of the EU will be banned from the UK for "the foreseeable future".
The Olympics juggernaut is crushing all in its path.
Is this entirely wise that it is allowed to run amok in this way?
Head of the new Migration Advisory Council (MAC), Professor David Metcalf, has told a committee of peers that the situation of UK immigration may have to change if there are labour shortages brought on by the Olympics.
Quote:
"One would certainly want to see whether or not it could be sensibly filled by British employers. The worry I think one has about this, is the inevitable tension between the short run and the long run. If you talk about the Olympics having to be on-stream by 2012 and therefore the facilities having to be built by 2011, a modern apprenticeship is three years."
Under the point-based system for migrants, which will be introduced soon, workers who are considered unskilled and come from outside of the EU will be banned from the UK for "the foreseeable future".
The Olympics juggernaut is crushing all in its path.
Is this entirely wise that it is allowed to run amok in this way?
Wednesday, 23 January 2008
The New Dagenham
Whilst those who are pushing the London 2012 Olympics as being the springboard for the regeneration of the East of London, there are others who quite rightly see the legacy of the games as offering little more for the residents of the East as Dagenham did when it was constructed in the 1930's.
Lord Mawson has warned that the multibillion investment in renewal schemes around the Newham Olympic site was in danger of being wasted.
Quote:
"The next 12 months will, for good or bad, cast the die for the next 100 years in east London.
What we see emerging . . . are two options: either we will build a new metropolitan district of London in the east, or we will end up with a giant housing estate."
Mawson notes that simply building thousands of new homes, "which will look fine for the world's TV cameras in 2012" is not enough.
Quote:
"Will today's public sector bodies leave us with another Dagenham on our doorstep for future generations? If so, a historic opportunity will have been missed, and east London will be destined to another 100 years of relative poverty and deprivation."
The "legacy" will be designed to look good on TV, and enhance the politicians' egos; it will not be designed to satisfy the needs of the people who have to live and work there.
Lord Mawson has warned that the multibillion investment in renewal schemes around the Newham Olympic site was in danger of being wasted.
Quote:
"The next 12 months will, for good or bad, cast the die for the next 100 years in east London.
What we see emerging . . . are two options: either we will build a new metropolitan district of London in the east, or we will end up with a giant housing estate."
Mawson notes that simply building thousands of new homes, "which will look fine for the world's TV cameras in 2012" is not enough.
Quote:
"Will today's public sector bodies leave us with another Dagenham on our doorstep for future generations? If so, a historic opportunity will have been missed, and east London will be destined to another 100 years of relative poverty and deprivation."
The "legacy" will be designed to look good on TV, and enhance the politicians' egos; it will not be designed to satisfy the needs of the people who have to live and work there.
Tuesday, 22 January 2008
The Shooting Party
As noted in an earlier article last year, there is a row between London 2012 organisers and the governing body of British Shooting over the proposed shooting venue for the London Olympics 2012.
Philip Boakes, chairman of British Shooting, wants the venue in Woolwich changed and has written to every MP on the subject.
Mr Boakes quite rightly believes that it is a waste of £25M to build the ranges, only to demolish them at the end of the Games. He wants the venue moved to Dartford, and the money invested into a shooting range that will remain after the Games.
London 2012, for their part, are insisting that the venue must be as near as possible to the Olympic Park.
Mr Boakes is quoted in The Times:
"Our alternative at Dartford also allows the athletes to remain in the Olympic Village - under 45 minutes drive away - so that argument does not stand. Other sports have already had their venues moved so why not shooting?
We will have nothing left for shooting after the end of the Olympics and that is the reason we are so unhappy."
The games are a waste of money PERIOD!
Philip Boakes, chairman of British Shooting, wants the venue in Woolwich changed and has written to every MP on the subject.
Mr Boakes quite rightly believes that it is a waste of £25M to build the ranges, only to demolish them at the end of the Games. He wants the venue moved to Dartford, and the money invested into a shooting range that will remain after the Games.
London 2012, for their part, are insisting that the venue must be as near as possible to the Olympic Park.
Mr Boakes is quoted in The Times:
"Our alternative at Dartford also allows the athletes to remain in the Olympic Village - under 45 minutes drive away - so that argument does not stand. Other sports have already had their venues moved so why not shooting?
We will have nothing left for shooting after the end of the Olympics and that is the reason we are so unhappy."
The games are a waste of money PERIOD!
Monday, 21 January 2008
Money Well Spent?
The Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, today unveils a new £9M international development project designed to inspire a new generation of sports enthusiasts around the globe.
London Olympic organisers are joining with UK Sport, the Premier League, Unicef and the British Council to develop 'International Inspiration', starting with five pilot schemes which will try to spread the Olympic message to some of the world's poorest countries.
The pilots, which will take place in India, Azerbaijan, Brazil, Palau and Zambia, will run until 2010.
The cost of "inspiration" is to be added to the £12BN London Olympics bill.
Money well spent?
London Olympic organisers are joining with UK Sport, the Premier League, Unicef and the British Council to develop 'International Inspiration', starting with five pilot schemes which will try to spread the Olympic message to some of the world's poorest countries.
The pilots, which will take place in India, Azerbaijan, Brazil, Palau and Zambia, will run until 2010.
The cost of "inspiration" is to be added to the £12BN London Olympics bill.
Money well spent?
Friday, 18 January 2008
The Olympics Legacy
Tower Hamlets council is in talks with London 2012 Olympics organisers with a view to taking the land used for the Olympics site, after the Games, for a multi-faith cemetery.
Tower Hamlets council's regeneration director Emma Peters has been having preliminary talks with the Olympic Delivery Authority on a possible deal.
A symbolic legacy for these games!
Tower Hamlets council's regeneration director Emma Peters has been having preliminary talks with the Olympic Delivery Authority on a possible deal.
A symbolic legacy for these games!
Thursday, 17 January 2008
Scotland Gets The Bill
In its continuing attempts to prevent the budget for the London Olympics 2012 spiralling even further out of control, the Olympics Delivery Authority (ODA) has sent a bill to Scottish Enterprise for £500K.
This being ODA's calculation of Scotland's share of the £6M construction cost of the Olympics site, failure to pay the bill will prevent full access to procurement opportunities.
Needless to say there are some very unhappy people north of the border, who accuse the ODA of contradicting its earlier pledges to spread the economic benefits of the 2012 games throughout the UK.
Andy Watson, the Federation of Small Business (FSB) Scotland's press and parliamentary officer and who also sits on the London 2012 Economic Development Sub-group, accused the ODA of attempting to "claw back" money to compensate for an overspend on its website.
He is quoted in the Scotsman:
"Scottish Enterprise is quite right if it is refusing to pay this.
They were not consulted in advance by the ODA about how the scheme was to be financed, they were simply sent an invoice for being included in the service. Their money is far better spent on supporting Scottish businesses.
This is the first big chance for the ODA to overcome scepticism on how the procurement side of the Olympics will be handled. Their message is: if you want to play, you have to pay."
Pete Wishart MP, the SNP's Westminster spokesperson on culture, media and sport, said:
"Scottish lottery funds have just been raided to subsidise the Olympics and now we're being asked to pay for the privilege of competing for contracts. You really couldn't make it up."
I wonder what the ODA will do to cover the shortfall if Scotland doesn't pay up?
This being ODA's calculation of Scotland's share of the £6M construction cost of the Olympics site, failure to pay the bill will prevent full access to procurement opportunities.
Needless to say there are some very unhappy people north of the border, who accuse the ODA of contradicting its earlier pledges to spread the economic benefits of the 2012 games throughout the UK.
Andy Watson, the Federation of Small Business (FSB) Scotland's press and parliamentary officer and who also sits on the London 2012 Economic Development Sub-group, accused the ODA of attempting to "claw back" money to compensate for an overspend on its website.
He is quoted in the Scotsman:
"Scottish Enterprise is quite right if it is refusing to pay this.
They were not consulted in advance by the ODA about how the scheme was to be financed, they were simply sent an invoice for being included in the service. Their money is far better spent on supporting Scottish businesses.
This is the first big chance for the ODA to overcome scepticism on how the procurement side of the Olympics will be handled. Their message is: if you want to play, you have to pay."
Pete Wishart MP, the SNP's Westminster spokesperson on culture, media and sport, said:
"Scottish lottery funds have just been raided to subsidise the Olympics and now we're being asked to pay for the privilege of competing for contracts. You really couldn't make it up."
I wonder what the ODA will do to cover the shortfall if Scotland doesn't pay up?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)