The Debate: Will Merseyside benefit from the Olympics?

Mar 11 2008 by Liza Williams, Liverpool Daily Post

Following last week’s announcement that Olympic training camps will be held in Merseyside, Liza Williams looks at whether the 2012 Games will help the region

VENUES within the North West that will play host to Olympic training in 2012 were announced last week, raising hopes that Merseyside will hold a central place in the festivities.

But following mounting costs and issues surrounding government funding of Liverpool’s Capital of Culture year, some are sceptical that any benefit will be seen locally.

So far, costs for the 2012 Olympics have risen from a projected £2.3bn in the bid documents to £9bn.

More than 20 North-West venues, including ACC Liverpool, Aintree Racecourse, Chester Racecourse, Edge Hill University, Lifestyles Picton 50m pool, Wavertree Athletics Centre and Halton Army Training Camp, near Lancaster, will be used by top athletes to train before the games begin.

And successful sporting stars such as gymnast Beth Tweddle think an area such as Merseyside will benefit because of the large amount of sporting venues on offer to athletes.

Olympic standard activities from boxing to archery and swimming will be taking place in the region’s sporting facilities as a result of the games and advocates say it will inspire a new generation of sports stars while helping to improve local facilities.

Jobs and economic benefits could also be brought to the region, with an increase in visitors and sporting tourists becoming aware of what facilities it holds.

But sceptics think Merseyside and the surrounding area has already lost out because of the Games, and the Government’s inclination to pump unlimited funds into it.

The Government refused to fund extra policing measures that Merseyside Police said was vital in Capital of Culture year, and others think the region is unlikely to attract any large-scale grants in the near future because of the rising cost of the Games.

So this week, we ask: Will the 2012 Olympic Games benefit the region?

lizawilliams@dailypost.co.uk

YES: The Case For - Best chance to transform the way sport is run

by Stewart Kellett, Sport England regional director

WHY should the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, that’s over four years and 200 miles away, provide any benefit to Merseyside?

Well, if communities as far away as 2,500 miles from Sydney can benefit from the 2000 Games, then there has got to be something in it for us.

The Games are the biggest peace-time events on earth, far, far bigger than the Commonwealth Games. Planning for the legacy of the Games was built into the Olympic bid. This is something that hasn’t happened in previous Games.

Last Monday, we launched the official Pre Games Training Camp Directory, where 14 venues in Merseyside were deemed to be Olympic class. As a 2012 legacy in Merseyside won’t happen by magic, we need to act now.

The Olympic Park has a critical path for construction and legacy in Liverpool, Merseyside and the North West is no different.

It started over 12 months ago and we launched our NW Legacy Plan, Be Inspired.

Merseyside has a lot to offer and a lot to benefit from, but it’s up to leaders in sport, at local authority level, schools, clubs, coaches and volunteers to grasp this.

Over the next four years, expectations of sport will increase.

The challenge for organisations is can they provide the support and investment to meet the anticipated increased demand? One of Sport England's roles is to influence a range of organisations to provide this growth, as well as invest directly in governing bodies of sport, clubs, coaches, volunteers and facilities.

We have the local hero demand phenomenon.

When we see Francesca Halsall and the new breed of talent coming through from swimming in Merseyside – and a medal or two, no doubt – it will inspire youngsters.

This isn’t a pipe-dream. I had the privilege of being at the Knowsley Sports Awards last year and I was blown away with the number of young people competing in national and world championship events.

New resources have been invested into community sports coaches at a local level. There are plans to help clubs develop, increase and retain membership. There are plans to further strengthen the critical link between school and club, and some exciting programmes to support disabled people achieve their potential.

I see this as the best opportunity ever to transform the way sport is perceived and run in this country. Sport at its best in every way, with representation and success in Merseyside. We need to be ready. More people wanting to play, coach and compete. Jobs and skills, pride and achievement for local people as the sports sector grows.

NO: The Case Against - As London’s costs go up, the signs are not looking good

by Paul Clein, cabinet member for children’s services, Liverpool City Council

LIKE just about everyone in the country, I was pleased (and surprised) when London won the nomination for the 2012 Olympic Games.

I am equally sure we all hope the month or so of the Olympics and Paralympics will be a great success. However, I have grave doubts that, 220 miles away, there will be any significant direct benefit for Liverpool and Merseyside as a result. If anything, it is arguable there has already been considerable disadvantage for us and many other areas of the country outside London.

When Manchester won the right to stage the 2002 Commonwealth Games at the other end of the East Lancashire Road, as with the London Olympic bid, the council was asked to give its support beforehand and we were assured by the organisers that this needn’t just be motivated by altruism on our part – at least some of the lesser events would be staged on Merseyside. And we believed them . . .

Once the initial euphoria died down, I and a colleague submitted a motion to Liverpool City Council asking our local Labour MPs to obtain assurances from their Government that funding the London Olympics would not result in a diminution of funds for Liverpool and Merseyside. No substantive promise resulted. A few months later, the Government backtracked on its commitment to provide £170m for Merseytram Line One.

The fact that most of the cost of Lines Two and Three would have been due to fall in 2011 and 2012 is presumably coincidence.

The fact that Merseyside has not since seen a penny of that £170m which we had been told was available for suitable alternative transport projects is yet another "coincidence".

We have seen a rise in the costs of the Games from the projected £2.3bn in the bid documents to £9bn plus so far (and still rising).

It seems Government has decided that – unlike any other priority for UK public funding – these Games will have a blank cheque, regardless of expense or the effect on budgets elsewhere.

Contrast that attitude with their repeated refusal to provide the additional £10m for extra Capital of Culture policing requested by the Merseyside Police Authority.

Liverpool, too, was a nominee of the UK, yet seems to have been treated very differently from London or Manchester for that matter.

Don’t forget the latter were allowed to capitalise some of their extra Commonwealth Games costs.

Lottery funding has been diverted from good causes to help supplement the cost of the Games and Arts Council grants reduced to help fill the bottomless Olympic bucket.

Given the way demand for funding continues to rise (despite the £400m contract awarded to consultants to act as "cost advisers" between 2007 and 2012 with a brief to control rising costs), I can only envisage even greater draining of the public purse and tightening of other budgets for the next four years, with increasingly negative knock- on effects on places like Liverpool.