The 2012 Olympics were originally due to cost £2,400,000,000
and a large part of the increase will now be taken from lottery funds.
2007-03-15 02:31:54 · 12 answers · asked by Rainman 4 in Sports ➔ Olympics
Here we go again - and this is only the first revised estimate - why oh why do we believe politicians. I think this is obviously a sure sign of ego building for Blair and Co, and the legacy of their running the country.
Thank god I stopped playing the lottery over a year ago, and will not be contributing again to fund this white elephant!!
And also having said the figure includes a contingency for further spend, you can bet your bottom dollar or pound coin, that the builders will snaffle that money away also. They always do when they come to give you a quote for new build/replacement/reapir in your own home, so why should the taxpayers money be any different.
Hand the bloody thing back now before it bankrupts the country and this government has morally bankrupted itself!!
2007-03-15 05:20:24 · answer #1 · answered by saintee 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Perhaps we should give up the idea now because this is only a year from the original quote and there is still 5 years to go. If Wembley is anything to go by it will not be ready until 2016 anyway.
I expect there will be a large donation for planning permission for the huge Mosque to be built in the East end of London we haven't got any family silver to get rid of left.
2007-03-15 02:47:13 · answer #2 · answered by Sunny Day 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No it is not. Half the stuff they build will be obsolete in about 3 years anyway. It is all a load of publicity rubbish that really has very little to do with sports anyway. I really don't see why there is all this fuss over it - why don't they just hold it somewhere that already has the facilities ?
The lottery funds are supposed to be for charities - not international jamborees.
I just bet the security is going to be a nightmare too.
2007-03-15 03:19:31 · answer #3 · answered by Debi 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
if we spent as much on our athletes that train for the olymics then yes. But as our athletes are not helped out by our government and we always seem to be below par at the olympics, then i do think it's a bit of a waste. However, in the UK, if you are a disabled athlete you can get all the support you need, and they come out with golds left right and centre! How about equal rights!!
2007-03-15 02:40:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
just done the math, thats £150 for every man woman and child in this country and a lot of the men women and children aren't employed. I would love to know the exact figure coming out of my wage packet.
2007-03-15 03:26:15 · answer #5 · answered by joe r 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
....and from London taxpayers pockets too (apparently!). Seems a bit cheeky really to spend so much money on something, especially when half the world is starving.......is it really that necessary?
2007-03-15 02:36:02 · answer #6 · answered by HC123 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes it will help to re generate london and shwo the world what britain can do.
2007-03-15 03:41:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is impossible (and I do mean impossible) to tell if it's money well spent until after the event.
2007-03-15 02:40:27 · answer #8 · answered by nontarzaniccaulkhead 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
maybe if your one of the chosen few who live in some parts of london. not for the rest of us.
2007-03-15 03:14:15 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's obscene. What ever happened to sticking to your original quote?
2007-03-15 02:38:33 · answer #10 · answered by willie 57 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋