The public accounts committee has criticised the government for seriously underestimating the cost of the London 2012 Olympics. They have said that better management of the construction project is required if the cost is not to spiral higher than £9.3bn. It also expresses concern about the legacy use of the Olympic Park venues in Stratford, east London, and the drain of National Lottery cash from other good causes.
So it was finally announced yesterday how much the Olympics is really going to cost us (at least until it is re-calculated in a year or so when they realise they still haven't got it right). After conning the British public and the rest of the world by promising to deliver the Olympics on a budget of £3bn, we're now told its going to be £9bn. I could go on about whether we should have bid in the first place but I think the real issue here is how it has risen so much. Is this another case of the government financial advisers' complete incompetence when it comes to valuing the cost of a project or was it a calculated piece of misinformation to try and get the public onside when the bidding process was in full swing? I fear it is a little of both.
The Daily Telegraph reports today that John Prescott has (rather amusingly) "thrown his weight behind a growing campaign at Westminster to force a rethink of the decision to site Britain's first super-casino in Manchester". Apparently he thinks it should never have gone to Manchester and that the independent advisory panel got it wrong. Tessa Jowell was, apparently, "stunned" by the decision not to award to Blackpool. And now 100 backbench MPs have called for a reversal of the decision. And all I'm left to do is ask, so what??!!
Cowboy John Prescott did his best to get Greenwich the deal and failed. Those in Parliament felt that Blackpool should have got it, but in the end Manchester won because an independent body was set up to decide. Has this government really got its way now for so long that it will challenge everything it doesn't agree with? And with such arrogance. They have effectively set up a body to come up with an answer and if they don't like the answer they turn round and say you got it wrong. Why bother setting it up in the first place if you won't accept their advice? Why waste taxpayers' money with the time and effort it took them to reach an independent decision if you're not interested in the independent decision. This whole casino debate has been a nonsense from the start. It was clear that the government wanted Greenwich ever since Big John was pictured in his Texan hat. Others in the government have clearly wanted Blackpool. Unfortunately, the advisory panel didn't play ball and now that rootin', tootin' John Prescott is throwing his toys out. Pathetic.
British film industry seems to be doing better than ever. The UK Film Council recently revealed that £840m was spent last year (up by 48% from 2005). Also more studios are coming to Britain. The change has occured after the introduction of a tax regime designed to facilitate low-budget domestic productions and lure big-budget investment. Gordon has been offering up to 20% tax relief to the film industry since 2005.
This is a fine example of government picking winners. Why does it consider producing films to be such an important industry? After all, it's existence is not in any shape or form crucial for the wealth of the nation and making films is still the prerogative of a small elite. Now the government promotes their business further.