Colin Berkeley Moynihan, 4th Baron Moynihan, Tory politician, Olympian, former Chair of the British Olympic Committee, Member of the European Olympic Committee and Chair of LOCOG, is now urging the Government to seize this opportunity to back British sports and invest in the next generation of state schools, asserting that the balance of public school educated medal winners is too high. [urlhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/news/9446407/Team-GB-chief-dominance-of-public-schools-is-unacceptable.html[/url

Being as he was a Member of Parliament in Thatchers government, nay, Sports Minister in Thatchers government - you remember, the government who gave permission for schools to sell off their playing fields - then thats where my irony meter exploded and I'm now trying to find somewhere to get it repaired.



PS - This 2km long rowing lake at Eton Dorney that we've all paid for - remind me again which school will be using it as their very own private facility after the Olympians have left ? [urlhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/berkshire/8709978.stm[/url

To balance that out, though - albeit to a very small margin I suppose - it was after our solitary gold at the Olympics in Georgia that John Major decided to first redirect some Lottery money into funding sports. That began the snowball effect as we have subsequently improved our medal haul and performance in certain fields as well as gradually increased financial support of sports (including corporate sponsorship).

Has Cameron yet taken credit for the Gold medals Team GB has won yet ?

The sport has, by and large, been magnificent.

And yes, last night was superb – but let's not forget others, including the women's team pursuit, who won gold in the sixth world record they've set in six successive races.

Which reminds me: Laura Trott – Turnford Secondary School
Danielle King – Hamble Community Sports College
Joanna Rowsell – Nonsuch High School

Stuff that in your pipe, former Miniature for Sport.

I would add, however, that however fantastic this is, it does not detract from the attacks on local businesses, civil liberties and goodness knows what else, and the obscene groveling to the corporate elite.

Some local comp?

The 'Miniature for Sport', if one remembers correctly.

We didn't pay for any of it, Eton own it and paid for it, they have given it to LOCOG for the duration of the games FoC, they did however gain quick planning permission for it.

Why would they need planning permission for something that already existed ?

They have had substantial building work done to improve access including a 50m long bridge, and I don't doubt for one minute that other "tweaks" and "adjustments" haven't taken place to facilitate hundreds of rowers and 30,000 spectators rather than a handful at any given time.

What Lord Moynihan is complaining about is the large proportion of medal winners (to date) who have come from a public school background and we all sit here open mouthed and wonder if he's noticed that there aren't too many state schools out here in the real world with their own 2km long rowing lake so that they can produce Olympic rowers - when his government invest in, lets say, a 2km long rowing lake for each region of the country (we're not asking for one for each state sports-foundation school, that would be greedy), then maybe the balance of medalists would shift.

As it is we do bloody well with state school athletes purely on the back of individual athletics clubs using state funded facilities, the likes of Jess Ennis coming from the Sheffield Council inspired Don Valley Club for instance, infrastructure funded entirely by the ratepayers of Sheffield.

As another example I worked on the main stand at the Gateshead Stadium in the late 1970s, a project funded by the Tyne & Wear County Council for public use on the back of Brendan Fosters enthusiasm and success - unfortunately the Tyne & Wear County Council was abolished as one of the Thatcher governments first cuts to public spending - a "Quango" I believe she called them, a public authority that dared to spend public money on public facilities for the public to enjoy, outrageous.

What has the London Olympic council tax surcharge, paid for some time now, paid for specifically, then?

(That's without getting into other tax funding)

No idea, it didn't pay for Eton Dorney though.



For the access roads and to make it bigger I understand, It is in quite a nice part of the country so even though they owned the land and had an existing lake they would still need PP.

I suppose all the superb facilities the residents of London will inherit after the games and the revenue streams they will bring, improved infrastructure etc.

I'm dead chuffed I was consulted over that, as local libraries and countless other services are being axed without my consent also.

Oh, and we are so going to lurve that cable car across the river. And the athletes village, which will not be sold or rented at anything like rates that enable the area's low-paid citizens to enjoy them.

Incidentally, what are our views on the negative impact of the Games on businesses?

I take it you voted - so in a democracy your consent was sort and adhered to. Let's face it this is your view on union ballots - surely you're not a hypocrite?

I think in any event of this nature there will winners and losers and on the whole the winners well out weigh the losers.

Also what was basically derelict land has been transformed into one of finest sporting facilities anywhere in the world. This simply enhances what is already one of the world's premier cities. Livingstone knew exactly what he was doing getting tax payers and lottery monies directed to this project.

Cable car - I bet you said that about the Wheel? now one of London's premier tourist attractions.

You feel aggrieved what about all those tax payers who have contributed to the OG and will see no benefit other than two weeks of TV.

Oh indeed, dearie. I consider voting to be the most simple and basic level of democracy. Not that we were ever given the chance to vote on the matter of the Games.



You could, of course, reveal here what elections were held in London (let's stick with the capital for the sake of the argument) and what votes we, the electorate therefore had a chance to vote in, when our opinion was sought.



Why?

Okay: lots of sporting winners. Great. But why? What does it benefit the country as a whole? What is the benefit to the community?



Livingstone was/is a banker. And that's irrelevant because I've said the same for years.



Urr! That's me, chuck! Are you seriously not paying attention? I'm getting no benefit. But that doesn't worry me. What concerns me are the businesses – and small ones in particular – that are SUFFERING as a direct result of the Games.

Could you get your brain cell around that, dear.

PS: glad to see you do not support British business.

Howzabout you pour yourself into a very stretchy leotard and get your ass down there then, and gain some personal benefit from all the expensive facilities we have so generously provided for you London types?

You certainly appear to be getting plenty of enjoyment according to your Twitter feed.

Numerically or monetarily?

If the latter (which is what I suspect), then it's failed in its promise.

How about you get a brain cell – and then exercise it? Given the education that the taxpayer has kindly given you, we should demand our money back.

In the meantime, I shall be enjoying a little gentle kayaking over the next few weeks.





Glad to see that you're paying attention.

I have never suggested that the sport would not be good. This does not change the assaults on civil liberties, the negative impact on small businesses in particular and the obscenity of the whole corporatist shebang. And because politicians have been promising that it will provide a big economic boost. Just because most of us suspect that politicians will say anything does not somehow change the fact that this was either spouted from ignorance/hope or simply a downright lie, because the Games are having a negative impact economically.

Indeed, one might ask whether you believe that your ability to enjoy RL should come at a cost to businesses, civil liberties, taxpayers etc? If not, why would this then be different?

One of my customers is a trial pilot site in Stratford, one of 4 convenience stores within walking distance of each other, 2 of which he purchased over the past 18 months with an eye on this fortnight, he has employed a further 19 staff since the start of July and is experiencing turnover growth in the 1000's% currently.

Not ALL small business is suffering, not ALL small business will gain either, sweeping generalisations don't work, not all Tier ones business in the West End is experiencing growth as forecast, but we don't feel sorry for them do we? as they are part of the corporarist elite. Suspect their temporary staff may do come September.

I think I posted something about the general impact on the centre of town last week. But a downfall in trade at, say, John Lewis, will not have the same impact as the downfall in trade on a small business.

Wow you really need to think before you post.

The OG was funded in the main out of lottery and taxes - lottery funding could be spent in our area instead of more superb facilities and regeneration for the wealthiest city in the country.

The decision to apply and fund the games was taken by democratically elected bodies, the fact you disagree doesn't mean you weren't consulted.

If we run a good games it must have a positive impact on the outside view of the country - it can only show the UK in a good light which will have positive commercial benefits later down the line. An example - Dave Brailsford the UK cycling bossman - he skills are already in big demand as the elite performance director in UK sport. Given what has happened in the OG do you think his reputation and demand for his services will have diminished? The benefit to the community - for one they don't have to look at the eyesore that was the olympic pary before its regeneration.

For every small business that is suffering - I think they will be few and far between - there will be many more small businesses who are benefitting from the increased footfall at the olympic venues. It isn't a massive leap of faith to suggest that many of the independant retailers arounf Eton have seen a boost to their turnover?

The fact you may not want to use any of the facilities doesn't mean you will not get any benefit - these facilities enhance the city and as such will be a revenue stream for many years to come. It is unrealistic to say these revenues and the spin off from them will not benefit the ordinary citizens of London.

Why, over the last couple of months, have you metamorphosed into a champion of "small businesses." Can we expect the next phase of your slow transition into adulthood to be to pupate as a champion of multi-national business' unifying influence in an otherwise disharmonious world; before finally blooming into a wonderous champion of investment banking?

Irony alert!





The decision to bid for the Games was never put to the electorate.



Hang on – you're having a guess about a beneficial impact on one individual?

And as for the "eyesore" – I do hope they got rid of all the radioactive material they rather casually started uncovering.

It is hootingly funny to see some on the right suddenly coming out in favour of state spending on things.



In Greenwich, on the first weekend, stewards shepherded arriving fans away from the local market; at one point, actually putting barriers up, blocking off the road to the market. One stallholder, for instance, having paid his regular £50 for his space, actually only made £25.

I've mentioned before the case of the husband and wife catering team at the Excel – they have two vans and have been there since it opened. They have had to remove the vans and put them somewhere else, at their own cost, for the duration.

I have also mentioned the local furniture maker who was told that he could only open his workshops after 11pm each night – in an area where there are no buses etc running at those times, so most of his workforce wouldn't be able to get there. Locog didn't want "unnecessary traffic".

Then, as I think I've also mentioned, there's the cafe just off Euston Road where trade has plummeted to levels that, apparently, the owner says he has not seen since the week or so after they first opened.

These are examples I know about specifically. I suspect that I don't somehow know the only examples.



One wonders if they'll be affordable to many of the public in the area. And as I touched on (which you have chosen to ignore), it's fine to be opening sy sports stadia when you're closing libraries at the same time – and, indeed, after successive governments have ordered and presided over, the sale of sports fields and grounds (especially those connected to schools), and the closure of sports facilities that already existed, and which local people used.

I haven't.

Next!

Good. I thought the world had gone mad.

PS Did you ever read the Paul Kingsnorth book I recommeded and you were going to purchase?