The TaxPayers' Alliance - Media Coverage

Freelance UK: Freelance execs cash in on Olympics

Freelancers who ‘go direct’ typically enjoy higher take-home pay than their counterparts who use recruitment agencies and pay for the privilege.

But temporary consultants who’ve signed up to staffing firms supplying the organisers of the London 2012 Olympic Games have broken this mould.

Figures released under the Freedom of Information Act reportedly reveal 65 agency workers last year pocketed a whopping £7,707,000 - the equivalent of around £118,500 each.

The single highest amount paid to one unnamed agency worker was £1,200 a day, reviving concerns that the Olympic Delivery Authority is squandering its funds.

Most of the consultants were used during the start-up stage of the Olympic programme, which involved the design, construction and implementation of facilities.

However the biggest beneficiary was not workers in these sectors – but the agencies themselves: London-based executive recruiter Rockpools earned £1,885,898 from its supply.

Not even half as prosperous was Reed Personnel Services, but the Northampton agency still earned £525, 939, beating Hedra Plc, the third highest-paid recruiter, which netted £491,885.

The figures, which emerged yesterday, arrive at a difficult time for Olympic Delivery Authority: last week a poll showed six out of ten Brits feel the Games is not a worthwhile investment.

Moreover, questions have been raised about the large sums paid to high-profile personnel tasked with promoting the event or ensuring its administration in time for 2012.

In particular, Princess Anne, a non-executive director and head of the British Olympic Association, received £4,000 in fees for attending four board meetings lasting a total of ten hours.

Similarly, Jonathan Edwards, the former Olympic triple jump champion, earned £14,500 to represent athletes, further to an extra £87,000 for ‘consultancy services’, The Daily Telegraph reported.

Disclosures of the exorbitant fees came after organisers admitted the budget for London 2012 has leapt from £2.4bn to a projected £9.3bn – four times the original estimate.

Little wonder then that about nine in ten Brits think the games will go over-budget, while two-thirds think the event is an unnecessary risk – in contrast to the widespread support initially.

Matthew Eliot, chief executive of the Taxpayers Alliance, which commissioned the poll, yesterday summed up the feeling among taxpayers, who are partly funding the over-spend.

He told the Daily Mail: “When London bid for the 2012 Olympics, we were told it was a golden opportunity to showcase the capital and encourage sport.

“Now we’ve got the Games, it seems to be a tawdry money-making opportunity for a few fat cats at taxpayers’ expense. No wonder people are disillusioned.”

But a spokesman for the authority defended the lavish spend on temporary workers.

He told the paper: “This project has a massively challenging timetable. It was essential we hit the ground running during the start-up phase by quickly recruiting agency personnel with extensive industry experience.”

Daily Mail: Olympic casual staff earned up to £1,200 a day

Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said:  'When London bid for the 2012 Olympics, we were told it was a golden opportunity to showcase the Capital and encourage sport.

'Now we've got the Games, it seems to be a tawdry money-making opportunity for a few fat cats at taxpayers' expense.  No wonder people are so disillusioned.'

Daily Telegraph: Part-time Olympic staff 'paid £7m'

Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said:  "When London bid for the 2012 Olympics, we were told it was a golden opportunity to showcase the capital and encourage sport.

"Now we've got the Games, it seems to be a tawdry money-making exercise for a few fat cats at taxpayers' expense.  No wonder people were so disillusioned."

Times: Olympics disappoint

Nearly two thirds of the public are opposed to the 2012 Olympics, and would prefer to see the money spent on public services or tax cuts, a YouGov survey has found.

The survey, for the TaxPayers Alliance, found that 44 per cent of people think the Pounds 9.3 billion cost of the Games should go on schools and hospitals, while a further 20 per cent would like to see the money spent on reducing taxes.

Yorkshire Post: Two thirds opposed to cost of 2012 Olympics

A vast majority of voters (82 per cent) oppose any increase in the tax burden, according to a new poll.

The survey found that almost half of those questioned (44 per cent) would like the party they support to promise tax cuts and 40 per cent would be more likely to vote for a party if it signed a pledge not to increase taxes.

Around two-thirds of those taking part in the poll for the TaxPayers' Alliance, which campaigns for lower taxation, said the Government spent too much money, and a similar majority (65 per cent) said public cash poured into health and education over the past decade had been badly spent.

Almost two-thirds (63 per cent) thought that few senior politicians had the necessary experience and expertise to run major public services, and 62 per cent said that Britain's system of government could be improved "a great deal".

The survey, carried out ahead of the political conference season, suggests a significant turnaround compared with the 1990s, when voters regularly voiced their readiness to pay more tax for better public services.

In this poll, just 6 per cent said they would like to see taxes rise and 38 per cent think they should be held at their present level. But 79 per cent said they expected their overall tax burden to be higher in three years.

It comes at a time when Conservative leader David Cameron is resisting pressure from his grassroots to promise tax cuts.

Although he insists the Tories remain a tax-cutting party, he has insisted he will not promise uncosted upfront reductions in tax in the run-up to the next General Election. Shadow Chancellor George Osborne recently pledged to match Labour's public spending plans for each of the next three years.

But the TaxPayers' Alliance survey found 85 per cent of Tory supporters - and half of those who identified themselves as Labour backers - thought the Government spent too much.

Around three-quarters of those questioned (77 per cent) thought a fair rate of tax was 25 per cent of household income - compared with the 35 per cent currently levied on the average household. Council tax was seen as the most unfair tax and the top priority for cuts.

YouGov questioned 2,162 adults for the TaxPayers' Alliance.

Birmingham Post: Two thirds opposed to the cost of 2012 Olympics

Almost two-thirds of the public are opposed to the expense of the 2012 Olympics and would rather see the cash spent on tax cuts or public services, according to a poll.

The YouGov survey for the TaxPayers' Alliance found 44 per cent of people think the stated £9.35 billion cost would be put to better use in schools and hospitals.

Another 20 per cent would like to see the money used to reduce taxation, with only 28 per cent maintaining that the benefits of the London Games will outweigh the financial risks.

There is also overwhelming scepticism about the Government's ability to deliver the Games within its existing budget, with just three per cent saying that it would. More than a third - 38 per cent - believed the budget would soar to at least £15 billion.

Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "This is the first concrete evidence that the British public has fallen out of love with the 2012 Olympics."

Daily Telegraph: Letter: Cost of the Olympics

SIR - Miss Jowell accused us of trying to scare people with our report on Olympics construction inflation.  Our estimate of the amount of construction inflation is taken from a study by EC Harris, a leading international construction consultancy.

Miss Jowell wrote that it "is a mistake to view 2012 as a cost, rather than an investment".  Investments have costs.  The cost of "investing" in the 2012 Olympics is larger than people thought.

Matthew Sinclair
The TaxPayers' Alliance
London SW1

METRO: Letter: Cheek by Jowell...

Minister for the Olympics Tessa Jowell accuses us at the TaxPayers' Alliance of trying to scare Metro readers with our report on Olympics construction inflation (Metro, Wed).  Apparently, the public can't be trusted with a proper understanding of the costs of the 2012 Olympics.

Our estimate of the amount of inflation, which will affect building costs around the country as a result of the Games, is taken from a study by EC Harris.  This is a leading construction consultancy, more qualified to speak on these matters than the minister, who presumably does not have much subject knowledge.  We applied the 1 to 1.5 per cent increase in inflation, which EC Harris calculates will be created by the Olympics Games alone, to a reasonable projection of non-Olympics construction spending.  This allowed us to work out an estimate of the likely additional costs.

Her letter constituted a disingenuous attack on the TaxPayers' Alliance and our attempt to help build an honest picture of the broader costs of the Olympics, which has simply not been done by the department responsible.

Matthew Sinclair,
The TaxPayers' Alliance

Metro: Letter: Building to 2012

The TaxPayers' Alliance is trying to scare readers with its claims about London 2012 adding £4 billion to the cost of other construction projects (Metro, Thu) but without the hard facts to back up what it says.  The reality is that the Games will account for a very small proportion of the total building work in Greater London and the South-East in the next few years and any increase in construction inflation is likely to be down only in very small part to a 2012 knock-on effect.  Big project though it may be, any impact from the Olympics (site pictured) must be seen in the context of the substantial work already planned for the South-East, including Heathrow's Terminal 5 and new East Terminal, the Thameslink rail scheme and the widening of the M25

Tessa Jowell,
Minister for the Olympics

Daily Telegraph: Letter - Olympic investment

SIR - The Taxpayers' Alliance is trying to scare people with its claims (report, August 9) about London 2012 adding £4 billion to the cost of other construction projects.  Inflation in the construction industry is not something peculiar to the 2012 project, but a worldwide phenomenon, generated by supply and demand for raw materials, manufactured products (such as steel) and labour.  The fact that construction inflation is running at a higher level than the retail price index was recognised by the National Audit Office in its report on the 2012 Games.

The reality is that the Games will account for just a very small proportion of the total building work in Greater London and the South-East in the next few years, and any increase in construction inflation is likely to be owing only to a very small extent to a 2012 knock-on effect.

Big project thought it may be, any impact from the London Olympics must be seen in the context of the work already planned for the South-East, incluiding Heathrow's Terminal 5 and new East Terminal, the Thameslink rail scheme and the widening of the M25.

It is a mistake to view 2012 as a cost, rather than an investment - and one that will produce very significant benefits for the whole of Britain, including world-class sports facilities, increased tourism and the transformation of one of the most deprived parts of our capital city.

Tessa Jowell
Minister for the Olympics
London SW1

Daily Sport: I want the Olympics to work but not at this price

By Alex Story

The Olympic Games saved my life. By the time I was 14, I had already been kicked out of three schools. My father grabbed me by the collar and told me I needed discipline. One Saturday he sent me to my local rowing club. From that point on I never looked back. I loved training and my team mates. Together we started dreaming of gold and glory. Pretty soon, I started to set my sights on the Olympics.

I remember thinking that if I died the day after winning the gold at the Olympics I would have lived a good life and done our country proud. What I wasn’t to know is how pen-pushers and bureaucrats would use the sportsman’s Holy Grail to hammer the hard working man.   We were initially told that the London 2012 Games would cost £2.4 billion and that the funds would come largely from the Lottery. Now we get a better but still hazy picture. The cost will be nearer £10 billion for the two week carnival. That is a third of what our boys in the army get from Gordon Brown every year, and they have been left fighting terrorists in Afghanistan without helicopters or proper equipment.

The problem is that this money for 2012 is going to come from you and me.  You can be sure that the cost will rise even more in the next few years as the deadline approaches and our incompetent bureaucrats start feeling the heat. It’s not just the costs of the actual games that will go sky high. It’ll also be the inflation costs on buying and building properties as the TaxPayers' Alliance has shown, adding an extra £4 billion. And to think that we once ruled the biggest Empire in the world on a shoe string!

Hard-working Britons are going to wake up from the celebration in five years time with a huge headache: a massive tax bill. I want the Olympics project to work but currently signs are not good.  I just hope that our kids will still be able benefit from the hope of Olympic glory as I did.

Alex Story, who rowed for Great Britain at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics, is a spokesman for the TaxPayers' Alliance 2012 Watchdog, www.taxpayersalliance.com

Builder & Engineer: 2012 Olympics will increase construction costs

According to analysts, the huge demand for construction will have knock-on effects in the wider construction industry, pushing up inflation by 1 to 1.5 per cent each year until the 2012 Olympics have been held.

As a result it will increase the costs of public buildings, potentially affecting plans for new schools, NHS units and GP surgeries.

Policy analyst Matthew Sinclair told B&E that one reason why inflation will rocket is because the Olympics is short-term demand and as a construction firm you’re not going to want to increase capacity to respond to it because it’s gone in a few years.

He said: “Increasing the cost of construction in London and the South East is not only hazardous to the health of the British economy but also imperils the objective of getting enough new homes built to make things easier for first time buyers. The bigger the bill for the Olympics becomes, the more damaging this knock-on hidden cost will be.”

The report also calculates that the increase in construction costs between now and 2012 will be felt in a number of areas leading to: a 1.5bn increase in the cost of private commercial buildings, new office and retail; £921m increase in the cost of building private housing; £640m increase in the cost of public buildings and a £237m increase in the cost of building public housing.

South London Press: Olympics 'to raise building costs'

The 2012 Olympics is set to raise construction costs by nearly £4 billion, it has been claimed.

Construction inflation is one of the biggest "hidden costs" of the London Games and it is set to rise by £3.9 billion in total by 2012, according to the Taxpayers' Alliance (TPA).

A massive injection of public money saw bulldozers start to clear the Olympic Park site in Stratford, east London, last month.

The impact of construction inflation in London and the South East could be to increase the cost of new public buildings such as city academies and GP surgeries and new private housing, making affordability even worse for first time buyers, according to the TPA.

It could also make new social housing more expensive in every London borough, it was claimed.

Construction and regeneration costs for the Olympic Delivery Authority now stand at £5.3 billion. The huge demand for construction this represents will have knock-on effects in the wider construction industry, pushing up construction inflation each year until the Games have been held.

For new construction orders in this region, which are expected to reach well in excess of £10 billion by 2012, this will mean substantially higher prices for buyers.

If the Olympics adds 1.25% to construction inflation each year between now and 2012, the increased cost of construction orders that can be linked to the London Olympics will reach £3.9 billion in total.

The TPA calculates the Olympics could see a £1.5 billion increase in the cost of private commercial buildings, new office and retail space and a £921 million increase in the cost of building private housing, potentially adding to house price inflation in London.

It predicted a £640 million increase in the cost of public buildings, potentially affecting plans for new schools, NHS units and GP surgeries and a £444 million increase in the cost of infrastructure work, without factoring in large potential projects such as Crossrail.

Sky News: Olympics To Boost Builders' Fees

The London Olympics is set to raise building fees in England by nearly £4bn, it has been claimed.

Construction inflation is one of the biggest "hidden costs" of the London Games and it is set to soar by 2012, according to the Taxpayers' Alliance.

A massive injection of public money saw bulldozers start to clear the Olympic Park site in Stratford, east London, last month.

Construction inflation in London and the South East could increase the cost of new public buildings, like city academies and GP surgeries, according to the alliance.

It could also boost fees for new private housing, making affordability even worse for first time buyers.

The increases might also make new social housing more expensive in every London borough, it was claimed.

Construction and regeneration costs for the Olympic Delivery Authority now stand at £5.3bn.

The lobby group said the huge demand for builders this represents will have knock-on effects in the wider construction industry, pushing up construction inflation each year until the Games.

For new construction orders in this region, which are expected to reach well in excess of £10bn by 2012, this will mean substantially higher prices for buyers.

If the Olympics adds 1.25% to construction inflation each year between now and 2012, the increased cost of building orders that can be linked to the London Olympics will reach £3.9bn.

The alliance's Matthew Sinclair said: "Increasing the cost of construction in London and the South East is not only hazardous to the health of the British economy but also imperils the objective of getting enough new homes built to make things easier for first-time buyers.

"The bigger the bill for the Olympics becomes, the more damaging this knock-on hidden cost will be."

Daily Sport: Olympics 'is bad for economy'

THE Taxpayers' Alliance has warned that the London Olympics in 2012 will add £4 billion to construction inflation in London and the South-East.

The budget for the Games has already increased from an estimated £2.4 billion in July 2005, when London won the bid, to £9.35 billion currently.

Hazardous

With five years to go until the start of the Games, the TaxPayers' Alliance has expressed concerns that the official budget may increase still further.

And they have set up a 2012 Watchdog to monitor developments.

Matthew Sinclair, policy analyst at the TaxPayers' Alliance, said:  "Increasing the cost of construction in London and the South East is not only hazardous to the British economy but also imperils the objective of getting enough new homes built to make things easier for first-time buyers."

Daily Telegraph: Olympics could add £4bn to building costs

By Graeme Wilson, Political Correspondent

The cost of building thousands of new homes, schools, hospitals and roads could soar by up to £4 billion as a result of the London Olympics, a new report claims today.

The hidden cost of the 2012 Games emerged following a study into the impact the project will have on the already over-stretched construction industry.

A study by EC Harris, a leading firm of construction consultants, shows that building costs will rise significantly as scarce resources are sucked into the Olympic project over the next five years.
advertisement

The consultants said: "Our view now is that the London Games will lift tender price inflation in London and the South East by some one to 1.5 per cent, to show increases of approximately 5.5 to six per cent over the next five years."

The report adds that the official bill for building the Olympic venues and infrastructure, along with regeneration in the immediate area, is now around £9.35 billion - up from the original forecast of just £2.4 billion when London won the Games two years ago.

A large slice of this budget will be spent on building the vast network of ambitious venues, along with the road, rail and other transport links to service them - a process that will also place unprecedented pressure on the construction industry in the South East.

As these resources become increasingly stretched and scarce, the price of other projects in the South will rise.

In 2012, the report estimates that the total bill for all non-Olympic construction projects across London and the South East - including new homes, hospitals, schools and infrastructure - will be around £16.7 billion.

It says this is some £4 billion higher than it would have been without the "Olympic effect" artificially fuelling inflation in the construction sector.

Alex Story, a spokesman for the TaxPayers' Alliance who rowed for Great Britain in the 1996 Games in Atlanta, said: "Most people are excited by the prospect of the London Olympics but the constant stream of negative news almost every month about bad management and rising costs will soon start to weigh heavy on people's enthusiasm.

"The picture that was painted to win the bid was far too rosy and the lack of honesty and transparency about hidden costs like these runs the risk of killing the buzz for what should really be an awesome party."

Matthew Sinclair, a policy analyst at the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "Increasing the cost of construction in London and the South East is not only hazardous to the health of the British economy but also imperils the objective of getting enough homes built to make things easier for first-time buyers."

METRO: 'Hidden £4billion cost' of Olympics

The 2012 Olympics will send building costs across the country soaring by almost £4billion, campaigners warn.

The Games will make social housing, doctors' surgeries and schools more expensive to build as they drive up prices for construction projects, according to the Taxpayers' Alliance.

As a result, it will become even harder for first-time buyers, especially in the capital and the South-East, to get on the property ladder, the group claims.

TPA spokesman Alex Story, who rowed in the 1996 Atlanta Olympics, said: 'Only prudent management can prevent the scale and complexity of the Olympics spiralling further.'

Bulldozers began clearing the Olympic Park site in Stratford, East London, last month.

Construction costs will account for £5.3billion of the total £9.35billion bill for the event.

But the lobby group fears it will create 'construction inflation' of 1.25 per cent a year because of the boom it will bring to the building industry.

The Olympics may mean a £1.5billion increase in the cost of private commercial buildings, new office and retail space, the TPA calculates.

It also suggests knock-on costs of £921million for private housing, £640million for public buildings and £444million for infrastructure such as public transport.

There could be a £237million increase in the cost of building public housing and £161million added to the price of private industrial buildings.

TPApolicy analyst Matthew Sinclair said: 'The bigger the bill for the Olympics becomes, the more damaging this knock-on hidden cost will be.'

Yorkshire Post: The Olympic race against time for taxpayers

By Blair Gibbs

IN five years' time, the torch will be lit in Stratford to celebrate the opening of the 2012 London Olympic Games. On the current course, it remains to be seen whether British taxpayers will have much to celebrate when the two-week event starts.

We have already come a long way from July 2005 when the successful bid was first announced. Back then, jubilation at the victory of London was certainly heightened by satisfaction at beating the French, the long-standing favourites. There had been scepticism throughout the bid process; London could not match Paris or the other bidding cities for their enthusiasm to win the games, or the infrastructure they already had in place.

Over the last two years, that initial excitement has subsided and been replaced by a growing distrust of the entire project.

According to a Populus poll last November, while a majority still supported 2012, the number of people disagreeing that "the benefit to Britain of having the Olympics here is well worth the money it will cost to stage the Games" had risen to more than a third.

Central to this disillusionment is that people are now wary of just
how much they might have to pay. Eighty-seven per cent of those
polled in the same survey agreed that it was inevitable that the
costs of the Olympics would prove much higher than initial estimates. So far they are being proved correct.

When the Olympics bid was commissioned, it was going to cost just £2.35bn. That sum was going to come from the National Lottery and an additional levy on London council taxpayers.

Now, the Olympics is set to cost £9.35bn and £6bn of that is to come from general taxation, so taxpayers in Yorkshire will not escape the
final bill.

As American Congressman Everett Dirksen once said: "A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money."

There have been a number of reasons why the Olympics has gone over-budget. First, the initial budget was massively flawed. As the Public Accounts Committee has noted, it didn't include whole categories of cost like VAT, contingency margins and wider security. It also expected to raise £738m in private funding; a quarter of the total. Now no significant private funding is expected for the building of the venues. On reflection, it really does look like a back-of-a-fag-packet calculation that was totally unrealistic.

What is worse is that there has already been a catalogue of mistakes and misfortunes in the running of this project that have pushed the cost up further.

The unelected quangos running the project – the London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games and the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) – thought nothing about blowing £400,000 on a bizarre logo no-one liked. A further £100,000 was spent sending a few lucky MPs on visits to countries that had previously hosted the games.

Just recently, Japanese Knotweed, the highly invasive plant that needs to be laboriously cleared before construction can take place, was discovered on the site of the two main Olympic stadia.

However, these aren't the biggest problems. The Public Accounts Committee discovered that proper arrangements for monitoring progress and managing risk were not in place and that there were no plans to ensure the facilities being built were suitable for new users after the Games have ended.

This and many more worrying blunders have contributed to the increase in the budget and threaten to create new over-runs because the Government has no limit on its liability for the cost of the Olympics – unlike a private company with customers and shareholders.

These problems are typical of many other over-runs discovered by a recent TaxPayers' Alliance survey of government projects, often with roots in bad management practice and political meddling. The American Jack Lemley left his post as ODA chairman last October saying: "I went there to build things, not to sit and talk about it." Edward Leigh MP, chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, said the project had "severe management difficulties", describing it as "a recipe for arguments and delay".

It was never possible to deliver the Olympics within the budget outlined at the bid and sold to voters. Those responsible should admit that and be held accountable for their mistakes.

However, I'm more interested in the future of the project and making the Games work. I want to ensure that the Olympics
does not go further over-budget (which is what happened in Athens as the final date loomed), not just in the interests of taxpayers, but because further increases would tarnish London's reputation and the whole two-week event, even before we have had a chance to win any medals.

That is why the TaxPayers' Alliance has launched a "2012 Watchdog". This new campaign will keep a close eye on the project, holding politicians accountable if they don't control costs and making sure that £9.35bn really is the final budget for the 2012 Olympics.

We will also monitor any signs that they are hiding costs in other budgets, or in contractual small print. And hopefully we can do our bit to represent taxpayers throughout Britain who love the idea of the London Olympics, but should never be asked to sign blank cheques.

Blair Gibbs is campaign director for the TaxPayers' Alliance

The 2012 Watchdog

By Matthew Elliott

Five years from today, the torch for the 2012 London Olympic Games will be lit.  It is still unclear whether British taxpayers will have much to celebrate.  Over the last two years the initial excitement at winning the Games has subsided and is being replaced by a growing distrust of the entire project.

While a majority still support the 2012 Games, the number disagreeing with the statement “the benefit to Britain of having the Olympics here is well worth the money it will cost to stage the games” had risen by 9 per cent according to a Populus poll in November 2006.  Central to this growing disillusionment is that people are becoming increasingly aware of just how much they might have to pay.  87% of them expected the budget to rise; they may not have expected it to rise as much as it did (We will be re-polling these questions later in the summer. Watch this space!).

When the Olympics was first announced it was going to cost just £2.4 billion and that sum was going to come from the National Lottery and an additional levy on London council taxpayers.  Now, the Olympics are set to cost £9.4 billion and £6 billion of that is to come from general taxation.

There have been a number of reasons for the Olympics going over budget.  First, the initial budget was massively flawed.  As the Public Accounts Committee noted, it didn’t include whole categories of cost like tax.  Looking back, it really does appear to have been a back-of-a-fag-packet calculation that was totally unrealistic.

What's worse, there has already been a catalogue of mistakes and misfortunes in the running of this project that have pushed the cost up further.  The unelected quango running the project thought nothing about blowing £400,000 on a bizarre logo no-one liked.  A further £100,000 was spent sending lucky MPs on visits to countries that had previously hosted the games – as if this made any difference at all.

However, the biggest problems are due to poor management practice. It is beginning to look like the Olympic Delivery Authority, the Olympics Minister and the Civil Servants in charge lack the management experience to deliver the Games on time and on budget.  Jack Lemley, Chairman of the Olympic Delivery Agency until last October, quit saying “I went there to build things, not to sit and talk about it.”  Edward Leigh also saw problems with the project’s management, remarking: “There is no single person in overall control”.

All this could mean further rises in the budget of the Olympics.  The TaxPayers’ Alliance has looked at Athens.  If London were to repeat the more than five-fold rise there we could see a budget as high as £12.6 billion.

A new campaign we have established – the 2012 Watchdog – will keep a close eye on 2012 and hold politicians accountable if costs rise further.  We will monitor closely any signs that they are hiding costs in other budgets to conceal over-runs.  We will represent taxpayers throughout Britain who should not wind up paying over the odds thanks to blank cheques written by their government.  Hopefully we can do our bit to make sure that £9.4 billion really is the final budget for the 2012 Olympics.

When the Olympics was first announced it was going to cost just £2.4 billion and that sum was going to come from the National Lottery and an additional levy on London council taxpayers.  Now, the Olympics are set to cost £9.4 billion and £6 billion of that is to come from general taxation.

There have been a number of reasons for the Olympics going over budget.  First, the initial budget was massively flawed.  As the Public Accounts Committee noted, it didn’t include whole categories of cost like tax.  Looking back, it really does appear to have been a back-of-a-fag-packet calculation that was totally unrealistic.

What's worse, there has already been a catalogue of mistakes and misfortunes in the running of this project that have pushed the cost up further.  The unelected quango running the project thought nothing about blowing £400,000 on a bizarre logo no-one liked.  A further £100,000 was spent sending lucky MPs on visits to countries that had previously hosted the games – as if this made any difference at all.

However, the biggest problems are due to poor management practice. It is beginning to look like the Olympic Delivery Authority, the Olympics Minister and the Civil Servants in charge lack the management experience to deliver the Games on time and on budget.  Jack Lemley, Chairman of the Olympic Delivery Agency until last October, quit saying “I went there to build things, not to sit and talk about it.”  Edward Leigh also saw problems with the project’s management, remarking: “There is no single person in overall control”.

All this could mean further rises in the budget of the Olympics.  The TaxPayers’ Alliance has looked at Athens.  If London were to repeat the more than five-fold rise there we could see a budget as high as £12.6 billion.

A new campaign we have established – the 2012 Watchdog – will keep a close eye on 2012 and hold politicians accountable if costs rise further.  We will monitor closely any signs that they are hiding costs in other budgets to conceal over-runs.  We will represent taxpayers throughout Britain who should not wind up paying over the odds thanks to blank cheques written by their government.  Hopefully we can do our bit to make sure that £9.4 billion really is the final budget for the 2012 Olympics.

Evening Standard: Olympic hopefuls who need cash to go for gold

By Katharine Barney and Ross Lydall

THESE are five London 2012 hopefuls whose hopes of winning gold medals are in jeopardy because of a lack of government funding.

The five have been identified as having the potential to compete in the Games by a council programme to find the elite athletes of the future.

But unless they get more financial backing from the Government, they may not even take part in 2012.

The five -- Tintin and Ping Ho, Melita Emanuel, Ben Langton and Ashley McKenzie -- were highlighted today by Westminster council, five years to the day from the opening ceremony.

They are aged from eight to 18 and their sports are table tennis, judo, canoeing and basketball.

Their talent was spotted by Westminster's Champion 2012 Programme, which also aims to encourage all children to get more exercise. None of the five get any significant government or commercial sponsorship.

Today the council said the scheme needs more than £150,000 to help pay for expenses such as training, mentoring, travel and accommodation.

Councillor Sarah Richardson said: "Westminster council has identified children with the talent to represent Britain in the 2012 Olympics. But without the help of central government or a new commercial sponsorship deal these children will be unable to reach their full potential.

"Government money should be going to local groups and council schemes rather than just national sporting governing bodies so everyone gets a chance to benefit from the Olympics coming to London.

"The scheme has helped the children get this far ... it is vital that we allow these children to reach the next level."

Concern is growing over grassroots funding for sport and cash for Olympic hopefuls.

Grassroots organisations expect to lose out on Lottery funding as it is diverted to pay for the bill for the Games, which soared to £9.3 billion.

Today pressure group the Taxpayers' Alliance launched a "2012 watchdog" to scrutinise the cost of the Games -- with a warning that inflation could increase the final bill to £12.6billion.

London's preparations have been praised by international inspectors and Mayor Ken Livingstone has promised there will be no fare or council tax increases to pay the bigger bill.

Bulldozers are starting to clear the Olympic park in Stratford this week and construction inflation is expected to top six per cent for two years. Extensive remediation of the former industrial land is required, especially around the aquatics centre.

This week the Standard revealed that designs for the 80,000-seat Olympic stadium were being revised to keep costs down.

Taxpayers' Alliance spokesman Alex Story, who rowed in 1996 in Atlanta, said: "The event lasts for two weeks but the huge costs might yet have to be borne by taxpayers for decades to come."

A Department for Culture, Media and Sport spokesman said: "We welcome the involvement of local councils but we feel sports themselves are best placed to identify and support talent. The Government is committed to athlete success in 2012 which is why we are investing £600 million in high-performance sport through UK Sport.

"The Talented Athlete Scholarship Scheme run by UK Sport provides our brightest young Olympic hopefuls financial backing and ensures that potential medallists for 2012 don't slip through the net."

Daily Express: The £12.6bn Olympics

By Gabriel Milland

The cost of staging London’s Olympics is expected to soar even higher, campaigners warned yesterday.
The TaxPayers’ Alliance claimed the final bill could top £12.6billion — a figure based on over-runs for the 2004 Athens Olympics and a hard-hitting report by the Government’s official spending watchdog.

The TPA’s claims the original budget may have to be quadrupled came amid growing concern the “revised” budget was under severe strain.

Olympics minister Tessa Jowell has revealed Treasury panicking over costs means the main stadium will not have a roof.

Builders have been told to slash £200million off the £700million projected cost of the new stadium but even then the final bill of £500million will be almost twice as much as the £280million cost originally estimated.

When the 2012 games were first planned, organisers said the expense would be just £3.3billion. But that sum had to be tripled after it emerged it did not include VAT or potential “contingencies”.

The TPA said it was forming its own 2012 Watchdog to monitor how taxpayer and lottery-player cash was being spent. TPA chief executive Matthew Elliott said: “The prospect of costs rising to £12.6billion will fill taxpayers with dread. It is beginning to look like the Olympic Delivery Authority, the Olympics Minister and the civil servants in charge lack the management experience and subject knowledge to deliver the Games on time and on budget.”

Alex Story, spokesman for the 2012 Watchdog and a former Olympic athlete added: “I want the London Games to work but we have to hold politicians to account for getting a good deal for taxpayers.”

The TPA said over-runs in Athens had been down to the organisers throwing money at projects in a bid to get them ready on time and added that given the Government’s track-record it was “entirely plausible” the same pressures could hit London.

A spokesman for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport branded the TPA report as “scaremongering.”

He added: “We welcome all scrutiny of 2012 but the claim by the TPA final costs could rise to £12.6billion does not stand up to scrutiny. Rigorous cost-control is in place across Government to ensure the budget is kept to and these claims take no account of the contingency of £2.7billion put into the funding package.”