Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hoey (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 29 October 2008. It occurred during Opposition day on Olympic Legacy.
Olympic Legacy
It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Maldon and East Chelmsford (Mr. Whittingdale). The fact that so many Members still wish to speak and we have such a short time left shows that this issue should be regularly debated in Parliament, instead of us having to wait for the Opposition to call a debate on it. The public want to know what is going on. Our constituents are asking us about Olympic legacy and it is important that we have these opportunities. It is also important that when people make certain criticisms or raise points, that is not seen as them being opposed to the Olympic legacy and the Olympic ideals. I worked with Colin Moynihan before he was chairman of the British Olympic Association to produce, on an all-party basis, a very good document called ““Raising the Bar””, many of whose recommendations I am delighted that the Government are gradually introducing. Many of the matters we are discussing this afternoon can be addressed on an all-party basis, which is why it is not particularly sensible for us to be dividing on this subject this afternoon, as the votes and the wordings of motions and amendments never fully reflect the full scale of the debate. I want to draw a distinction in terms of the legacy of the Olympic venues, to which my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham (Lyn Brown) referred clearly in her very good speech. A part of the Olympic legacy is the park and what will happen to it. Some of the legacy planning was not done early enough, and as the economic situation gets worse, we will be in an increasingly difficult situation. We clearly won the Olympic bid before the Beijing games on the basis of the legacy. Some people now probably wish that word had never been mentioned, because it is being used all the time. For me, the ““legacy”” does not mean just a fantastic Olympic games for the participating athletes; we take that for granted. I also think we should not even be thinking of trying to model ourselves on Beijing. We should, as far as possible, get back to the ideals of sport for its own sake. Of course, the athletes will make lots of money—the very successful ones will make huge sums. The broadcasters will also make money, and the International Olympic Committee will make a fortune out of the London games, but, ultimately, it is about delivering a good sports programme in good conditions. I am confident that LOCOG will do that very well, and that the Olympic Delivery Authority will make sure that the buildings are completed in time—even if it costs huge sums of extra money and that money comes from the contingency fund. The necessary amount will be found. The Olympic games will take place in 2012 no matter what happens to the economy. I agreed to take on the advisory job on the sporting legacy for London for the new Mayor of London because I believe that the legacy, in terms of the participation of Londoners—I am speaking here as a London MP—is what has been sorely missed out. There has been no planning and there has been no joined-up working on it. Some very good things are happening in all our boroughs that Members could talk about. Excellent partnerships are taking place, and there is a huge opportunity to work with the governing bodies. I particularly welcome Sport England's emphasis on ““all sport plans””, because, if they are carried through properly, they will address the problem in areas of London, such as my constituency, where substantial numbers of young people from black and ethnic minorities have not been participating for a variety of reasons. That will have to be built into the all sport plan, which is where local communities will increasingly have to look to get their funding. This ambition can be achieved. Londoners are paying a little bit extra, although I know that Scotland has its problems in terms of what it will get out of this, as does Northern Ireland. On Northern Ireland, I ask the Minister for the Olympics, the Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, my hon. Friend the. Member for Bradford, South (Mr. Sutcliffe), the Secretary of State and the shadow Secretary of State to stop referring to ““Great Britain””, as that term excludes a substantial part of the United Kingdom. The name of the team should be Team UK. I have made that point to the BOA since my time as Sports Minister. I understand that Team GB might sound better, but it would not take much effort to start talking about Team UK, and we must stop referring to Great Britain. This is a games for the whole of the United Kingdom. Londoners are, however, paying a little bit extra.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 481 c939-40
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Curriculum Employment Finance Horse riding Facilities Public participation Sports Greenwich London Development Agency Olympic Games 2012
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 00:46:01 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_504261
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_504261
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_504261