It's highly debatable whether the Olympics could be considered a 'good cause' and the games certainly don't qualify as a charity, so why does this government think it's OK to help themselves to lottery funds to pay for the Olympics ?
Should we boycott the National Lottery ?
2007-03-17 23:54:45 · 12 answers · asked by Cassandra 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I'm living in the USA now but I was still in the UK when we got the lottery. I put up with the silliness of the Millenium Dome, thinking it would be just a few years and then we would get down to supporting good causes as originally envisaged by John Major. It seems that the lottery has pulled away from that and, if I were still in the UK, I would be wanting to know where my money was going, as I would with any other charitable cause. If I feel that a charitable cause does not spend its money properly, I do not support it. I do not think that a major event which will only benefit one area of the country is deserving of so many funds from other parts of the country. London's businesses and local governments (who will be the ones to benefit) should fund the Olympics.
2007-03-18 00:04:01 · answer #1 · answered by skip 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The city that bids for the games should be able to pay for the staging themselves and not be funded by government or state lotteries.
They should borrow the money to do all the construction and pay back out of the sale of tickets and future use of facilities this hopefully would force them to ensure that the games make a profit and it would also help keep a cap on the amount spent rather than an open purse from the government.
It should also be pointed out that there will be at least one election before the games so a new administration could change everything.
PS I dont do the lottery anyway so a boycott from me would have no effect but I would love to see it happen and wonder at what the concequences would be.
2007-03-18 07:11:11 · answer #2 · answered by torbrexbones 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Because politicians tend to view the National Lottery fund as being a nice piggy bank to dip into. I saw a recent report by one of the individuals who run the fund who was very unhappy at the significant amount having to go to the Olympics. He explained that there would have to be cut backs for good causes with educational and community good causes losing millions as a result and many having to close. The alternative would be high taxation or private funding both undesirable. The problem I see is that the majority of the funds and improvements are going to be focused on London which already receives a high level of state funding with minimal national advantage.
2007-03-18 07:23:58 · answer #3 · answered by sanchia 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The only reason for using the nation lottery to fund the Olympics is because Gordon Brown doesn't want to use the money that he uses to line the government ministers pockets to pay for the games
2007-03-18 13:25:02 · answer #4 · answered by kooldudekylet 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I despair of this government. On the one hand they are saying that they support the voluntary sector and want to see it delivering more services and on the other hand they take Lottery money away from charities and give it to the Olympics.
Whoever did the first costings for the Olympics and left out VAT should be shot....and I think that no one really knows how much it will cost in the end.
2007-03-18 07:27:11 · answer #5 · answered by fengirl2 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
To be fair it's not just the Olympics it is funding, but but the regeneration of a huge swathe of East London as well. So, there is a good cause element.
What I hope doesn't happen is the work of the other lottery funds doesn't get devalued, and that in particular smaller projects don't lose out in this. They do a lot of valuable work, and it would not be fair on them if they were told, sorry you can't apply for money, we gave it to the Olympics.
2007-03-18 08:06:18 · answer #6 · answered by Don't Panic 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think that the lottery should fund the olympics, just for the reason that we are hosting it in 2012. We need the money to build this stadium in time, as people are saying that it won't be built by 2012. If we fund this, we could get more workers out and build it. For entertainment purposes, i don't think the lottery should fund it, as, like you said, the games does not qualify as charity.
2007-03-18 07:02:34 · answer #7 · answered by Ty 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Why not? If the money is there use it to improve the quality of the Olympics. It is not anyone's money as such. People have happily relinquished that money. I don't see anything wrong in uisng lottery money to fund the Olympics.
You are living in a dream world if you think people would boycott the notional lottery. Greed and dreams of fortune are powerful motives and deterrents to a boycott.
2007-03-18 07:08:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
It is for the national lottery to choose where it spends its money. The problem has come becuase the budget has increased so much they are having to put more money in. This will affect charities accorss the UK, the money which is generated through the natioanl lottery should be distributed fairly throughout the UK not just London!
2007-03-18 07:02:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
The Olympics not only represent our country to the world in a peaceful way, the encourage countless children to try harder to be their best. The government should be paying for it. It would be a shame to hear, "Welcome to the 2016 Budwieser Winter Olympics Games"
Even if you think it's a waste of money, there are worse things that money is being wasted on.
2007-03-18 07:04:42 · answer #10 · answered by Mitzi 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋