House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee
London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games
Oral and written evidence
Tuesday 24 January 2012 Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport, Hugh Robertson MP, Minister for Sport and the Olympics, and Jonathan Stephens, Permanent Secretary, Department for Culture, Media and Sport
Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 24 January 2012
HC 689-v Published on 7 March 2012 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £5.50
The Culture, Media and Sport Committee
The Culture, Media and Sport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and its associated public bodies.
Current membership Mr John Whittingdale MP (Conservative, Maldon) (Chair) Dr Thérèse Coffey MP (Conservative, Suffolk Coastal) Damian Collins MP (Conservative, Folkestone and Hythe) Philip Davies MP (Conservative, Shipley) Paul Farrelly MP (Labour, Newcastle-under-Lyme) Louise Mensch MP (Conservative, Corby) Steve Rotheram MP (Labour, Liverpool, Walton) Mr Adrian Sanders MP (Liberal Democrat, Torbay) Jim Sheridan MP (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North) Mr Gerry Sutcliffe MP (Labour, Bradford South) Mr Tom Watson MP (Labour, West Bromwich East)
Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk.
Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the internet at www.parliament.uk/parliament.uk/cmscom. A list of Reports of the Committee in the present Parliament is at the back of this volume.
The Reports of the Committee, the formal minutes relating to that report, oral evidence taken and some of the written evidence are available in a printed volume.
Additional written evidence is published on the internet only.
Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Emily Commander (Clerk), Sarah Heath (Assistant Clerk), Elizabeth Bradshaw (Inquiry Manager), Jackie Recardo (Senior Committee Assistant), Keely Bishop/Alison Pratt (Committee Assistants) and Jessica Bridges-Palmer (Media Officer).
Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 6188; the Committee’s email address is [email protected]
List of witnesses
Tuesday 24 January 2012 Page
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport, Hugh Robertson MP, Minister for Sport and the Olympics, and Jonathan Stephens, Permanent Secretary, Department for Culture, Media and Sport Ev 61
List of written evidence
1. Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) Ev 73 2. London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) Ev 74 3. Department for Culture, Media and Sport Ev 77
cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [SO] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence Ev 61
Tuesday 24 January 2012
Members present: Mr John Whittingdale (Chair)
Dr Thérèse Coffey Mrs Louise Mensch Damian Collins Steve Rotheram Philip Davies Mr Adrian Sanders Paul Farrelly Mr Gerry Sutcliffe ______
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport, Hugh Robertson MP, Minister for Sport and the Olympics, and Jonathan Stephens, Permanent Secretary, Department for Culture, Media and Sport, gave evidence.
Q365 Chair: Good morning. This is a further session very important to keep bearing down on costs to make of the Committee’s ongoing examination of sure that we maximise that headroom. preparations for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, and I would like to welcome the Q367 Mrs Mensch: As things stand, the national Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, lottery have been promised a £675 million rebate. Are Jeremy Hunt; the Minister for the Olympics, Hugh you confident you are going to be able to deliver that Robertson, and the Permanent Secretary, Jonathan rebate? Perhaps Mr Robertson might answer that one. Stephens. I am going to invite Louise Mensch to Hugh Robertson: It all depends on the movement of begin. land values on the park, and there was a bullish Mrs Mensch: Secretary of State, we have six months estimate done at the beginning of the process and then to go now before the Games kick off. How confident an extremely pessimistic one done just recently. is the Government that the budget, which at present is Remember, of course, it is not strictly an either/or. £9.3 billion, is not going to be exceeded? You don’t get the whole £675 million or nothing. Jeremy Hunt: You can never say never, but we are as There are a variety of amounts in between those two. confident as we reasonably can be. If you look at the It is absolutely a commitment of this Government to overall numbers, of the £9.3 billion budget, we have ensure that that money is safeguarded, and that will committed £8.5 billion, so there is about £800 million be written in the new agreements when the Mayoral that has not been committed, and of that £800 million Development Corporation is formed next year. With a there is about £300 million of known cost pressures. fair wind and good luck, that money will be repaid, We may not need to spend all that. The last figure that but there is a time lag because it is dependent on we published in terms of unallocated contingency was land sales. for the end of quarter 3 2011, and that was £528 Mrs Mensch: Just to be absolutely clear, you at the million. We will shortly be publishing the figures for moment are still anticipating returning the full £675 the end of the last quarter of last year and we do not million. expect it to have changed significantly, which I think Hugh Robertson: Correct. is an encouraging sign. Obviously, the closer you get Mrs Mensch: You are, thank you. to the Games, the less likely it is that you are going Hugh Robertson: But it is dependent on land sales. to end up being able to spend £500 million, and we continue to control costs very tightly. It is a very Q368 Mr Sanders: In the context of a time of important objective of ours to deliver this project austerity, how can you possibly justify spending an within budget. additional £41 million on just the opening and closing ceremonies? Jeremy Hunt: It was a decision that we looked at very Q366 Mrs Mensch: Do you see, then, any risk to the hard. It is a lot of money, but it is not just less than public sector funding package and, if so, how are you the Chinese spent on the Beijing opening ceremony, mitigating those risks? For example, is the nascent because it is also less than the Canadians spent on crisis in the eurozone a risk to the public sector their opening ceremony and less than the Russians are funding package? planning to spend on their opening ceremony. While Jeremy Hunt: There are lots and lots of risks and we I fully accept that you get a lot of flak for a decision spend a great deal of time going through the risks, like that, you would have been questioning me much quantifying them and trying to estimate the likelihood more critically in a year’s time if we had not made of them happening. The purpose of that contingency, the most of an absolutely unique moment that is which currently is still around 25% of the total potentially going to be seen by 4 billion of the world’s original contingency that was left, is to give us some 7 billion population. Martin Sorrell estimated that it headroom if there are unanticipated things that go would be potentially worth £5 billion to the UK in wrong that we need money for; a change in the terms of how it would promote the UK. It is not just security situation, for example, would be an obvious a question of making sure that we put our best foot one to point out. As I say, we have some headroom forward when we are at the centre of the global but we can never be complacent, and that is why it is spotlight. I see it as an extraordinary business cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Ev 62 Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence
24 January 2012 Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Hugh Robertson MP and Jonathan Stephens opportunity. There are tourists all over the world who a moment, to get that message across and I am very are making decisions as to which countries to visit, happy to be held accountable for my decisions in there are students deciding which country to study in, wanting to be able to say to everyone that we did there are businesses deciding which country to invest everything possible to make sure that we did not in, and if you get something like the opening scrimp on such an extraordinary opportunity. ceremony for the Olympics right, you strengthen our Mr Sanders: But that was the original plan, so why national brand in a way that is very hard to quantify have you had to double the budget to do it? but that I have absolutely no doubt will be extremely Jeremy Hunt: The original plans were published positive for British businesses and British jobs. many years ago and they were published with a Mr Sanders: But you cannot put a figure on it? contingency because, at the time, the then Jeremy Hunt: No, and we could get into some Government recognised that you do not always know pettifogging— every detail about every cost until you get nearer to Mr Sanders: For a lot of people, ceremonies are the event. What happened was that Danny Boyle, who laughable events. It is actually the event as a whole I think will do an extraordinary job with the opening that derives benefit. How much is this event going to ceremony, then finalised his plans and they came with cost if it has almost doubled in cost? a higher price tag than was in his budget and a higher Jeremy Hunt: I think the proof of the pudding will be price tag than we were prepared to pay. We then had what people say after they have seen the opening an iterative process, as so often happens in these ceremony. situations, and we came to an agreement over a Mr Sanders: That is after the money has been spent. ceremony that I think we will all be able to feel very Jeremy Hunt: That is true. proud of. Mr Sanders: Is it necessary to spend twice as much Chair: Are you suggesting Danny Boyle wanted to as you originally anticipated? It is irrelevant what spend more than £80 million? other countries spent on this event at the end of the Jeremy Hunt: I think what I want to say is we had day because there are different costs at different times. complete agreement that this had to be a fantastic Jeremy Hunt: With respect, Mr Sanders, I don’t think ceremony and we managed to come to the right place. you can be held accountable for something before you have seen what it is you are accountable for. I am Q370 Mr Sutcliffe: I was fortunate enough to be at sticking my neck out in a big way for this opening the opening event in Beijing, which was a fantastic ceremony. We are, as a Government, saying that we event and went on for four hours with a tremendous are not accepting what the naysayers would say. We amount of fireworks. What we said at that time was are not going with the conventional wisdom that in we would not try to compete with the opening times of austerity you should rein back on absolutely ceremony at Beijing because of the expense that they everything, because we think this is a once in lifetime went to. You say this was your decision, and that is opportunity. You and 60 million other people will the question I would ask. Was this your decision or have a very strong view as to whether that was a good was it the Prime Minister’s decision? Who made the investment on 28 July, and I look forward to hearing what you say. decision to increase the budget by £41 million, and what consultation did you have with athletes? For instance, Paula Radcliffe has described this as a Q369 Mr Sanders: The Government is trying very, frivolous spend of money that would have been better very hard to get across to people that we are all in this spent on the legacy. Surely the judgement on the together, and here you are doubling a budget on two events. How long does each event last? A couple of Games will not be about the opening and closing hours, four hours? You are doubling the budget, £41 ceremonies. It will be about the whole content of the million, for four hours. You could do a rerun of the Games, both the Olympics and the Paralympics. Royal Wedding on big screen television if you want Jeremy Hunt: I completely agree with that. Can I to advertise some of our ability to run events. congratulate you on your presence on the Committee Jeremy Hunt: I very much hope, as you do, that we and say that you create a very high bar for Hugh and never have a rerun of the Royal Wedding. All I would I to climb over with your bet against the Australian say is that this is not about throwing money at a big Sports Minister about the performance of Team GB party. This is about an incredible investment versus the Australian team? opportunity in our national reputation. There will The point I would make is this, and I would make never be an opportunity like this in our history, and I exactly the same point to Paula Radcliffe. I think that our children and our grandchildren would completely agree, it is about the whole package. It is look at us very askance if we did not embrace not just about the ceremonies, it is about the sport. It is wholeheartedly the opportunity to massively about how competently we put on the biggest sporting strengthen our reputation across the world. I think it event on the planet. It is about the Cultural Olympiad, will be fantastic to remind the whole world that this the torch relay, the whole thing together. I think we is the country responsible for more of the inventions have taken a totally consistent approach. I would say that have shaped humanity than probably any other to Paula Radcliffe, for example, that Hugh Robertson country. This is the country that is the home of in this spending round fought very hard to protect the freedom and democracy. It is the country that is the funding for elite athletes, and that was one of the very home of more major sport than any other country in few areas of funding that did not get cut at all because the world and the home of extraordinary literature, we thought, two years before an Olympics, the last culture and art. This is the moment, if there was ever thing we wanted was to demotivate our finest athletes cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence Ev 63
24 January 2012 Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Hugh Robertson MP and Jonathan Stephens by cutting the funding going into their training On the costs side, where we have increased their programmes. That was a difficult decision. budget is where we have had Government guarantees We have taken a very ambitious approach to the that we have made over security of the Paralympics or Cultural Olympiad, which we think will be the biggest where we have changed the scope, as in the opening cultural festival that we have ever had in this country. ceremony that we have just been talking about, but I All these things are made much more difficult in the think the real messages, from what Paul was saying, context of the austerity that we are facing and the is that one can never be complacent and delivering incredibly difficult choices that we have to make as a this project in budget is incredibly important in the country, and sometimes the judgement you have to current climate. make is—and it was a judgement that I made but fully supported by the Prime Minister—do you make an Q374 Dr Coffey: You have already responded exception to the general rule that you are having to positively to requests for more money for the opening scrimp and save for every penny in difficult times ceremonies. How will the Department respond to because you have a one-off event, the likes of which further requests? you are never to going to see again, or do you risk Jeremy Hunt: Bear in mind the only thing that hits making a decision that you could be criticised for the headlines are the requests that we have responded generations to come when people say, “We had our to positively. There are many other times when we do moment on the international stage. Did we really not respond to requests positively. I think it is make the most of it?” That is what we are determined impossible to predict the answer to that question to do. without knowing what the reason is for the call for extra funds, but what my Permanent Secretary and Q371 Mr Sutcliffe: Will we get a breakdown after Hugh have been absolutely determined to do right the event of the costs of the opening and closing from the start is to make sure that there is an ceremonies? atmosphere of strict cost control where it is not possible to think that, if you need more money, if you Jeremy Hunt: Absolutely. have made a mistake with your numbers, you can just go to Ministers and ask for another cheque. When you Q372 Chair: This Committee, when we previously call LOCOG in front of this Committee, they will examined the funding package, once you add together confirm that, when they have come for requests for the programme contingency and the individual project extra funds, such as the additional money that has contingencies, came up with an estimate that been put into the security budget, which we may talk something around 40% of the budget was actually about later, there has been a very, very long process contingency, yet we are now at a point where, if the indeed before there has been any willingness to cough worst case of the NAO came about, you are going to up any more taxpayers’ money. exceed the budget. Would you not regard it as something of a failure that a contingency that large is Q375 Dr Coffey: Just out of interest, where is the all going to be spent? additional funding being sourced from, if it is Hugh Robertson: Absolutely I wouldn’t, Mr required? Chairman. Your analysis, if I might say so, overlooks Jeremy Hunt: The only place that we source funding the crucial fact that under the original budget both the from is the contingency budget. village and the broadcast media centre were due to be Dr Coffey: So it is not a case of you going off to financed privately because of the economic downturn. Treasury and saying, “We need more”? That was not possible, so they have been financed Jeremy Hunt: No. from within the budget and that is what has largely Hugh Robertson: It comes from the contingency. affected the figures that you have quoted. There is £500 million there. That is the first port of call. Q373 Dr Coffey: Given the Government’s role as guarantor for any LOCOG expenditure that goes Q376 Chair: Can we just turn to legacy, which is beyond the current forecast, how concerned are you something that we have spent a great deal of time on by Paul Deighton’s comments that the LOCOG budget in this Committee? First, I want to discuss the actual is very finely balanced? hard links, if you like, of the facilities. The two Jeremy Hunt: LOCOG has always budgeted to be in facilities that have caused most problems are the balance. They are not seeking to make a huge profit media centre and the stadium, and here we are and from the Games, but equally they are seeking not to both are still unresolved. Are you confident that you make a loss. I think Paul rightly has a very, very strict will be able to resolve them before the Games? attitude towards cost control and I think that they have Hugh Robertson: Yes. I will take a leap forward. I done a pretty good job of that. Overall, when you are would almost say, Mr Chairman, to turn that inside looking at their financial performance, you have to out. Bear in mind that on Friday we celebrate six look at their performance not just in controlling costs months to go and we already have six out of the eight but also in raising revenue. They have raised 92% of legacy venues nailed down. That is something that no their £2.16 billion budget, they are on track to get the other Olympic city has ever managed in the Olympic £527 million they need from ticket sales, and they Games before. Yes, it would clearly be nice if there managed to raise two-thirds of the sponsorship money were eight out of eight, but six out of eight is an before the financial crisis broke. I think they did a extraordinary achievement and one we should be very very good job on that side. proud of. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Ev 64 Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence
24 January 2012 Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Hugh Robertson MP and Jonathan Stephens
Chair: That is a glass half full approach, which I Hugh Robertson: Absolutely, point well made. We commend. have absolutely looked at the sensible lessons that Jeremy Hunt: Three quarters full. have been learned out of Manchester, which, to be fair, was regarded as a great success. Many people Q377 Chair: I am not sure in terms of the overall look at the Manchester stadium, the way it was cost, but we can dispute that. The stadium is obviously designed and hollowed down afterwards and then the thing that is attracting a lot of attention. We handed on to Manchester City, and look at what understand now that it is intended that the stadium is happened to Manchester City afterwards. Clearly, going to remain in public ownership— money from elsewhere has played a part in that, but Hugh Robertson: Correct, yes. it is a pretty good argument for how to get it right, Mr Whittingdale: The cost of conversion of the and I say that with a mad keen Liverpool fan sitting stadium is likely to be met from public funds and it is right next to me. Absolutely the lessons of that have estimated at £95 million. Where is that coming from? been learned. We will certainly build all that into the Hugh Robertson: Having questioned your question negotiations. Absolutely if somebody should come along, or if a football club was one of the legacy users last time, I am afraid I am going to do the same thing. and there should be a change of ownership in the It is very, very difficult to put a figure on the future and they should want to acquire the stadium, conversion costs of the stadium until you know what that will definitely be built into the process. It is not it is going to be used for. First we need to select the our intention that it should remain in public end legacy operator and then, as part of that, we will ownership indefinitely. look at what it is going to cost. The public money that might be available for such a conversion at the Q380 Steve Rotheram: moment is money already inside the ODA budget, the In 2010, the Sports Minister described the £135 million Places People Play public sector funding package for conversion that programme as the cornerstone of the Olympic legacy. would have happened had we taken it down to its Why do you think this programme has failed to 25,000-seater base case post the Games, and then any deliver the numbers and the increasing numbers of money that the OPLC, or the new Mayoral adults taking up sport so far, and do you believe it Development Corporation, when it is created, might will meet its 1 million target by 2013? wish to put into it to ensure an end legacy user. There Hugh Robertson: Because it has not yet completed. have been a variety of figures put in the press but it is The money has not yet been allocated. very hard to nail that down until we know exactly Steve Rotheram: Do you believe it will still meet its what the end use is going to be. target by 2013? Hugh Robertson: Will it, of itself, deliver the old Q378 Chair: Are you still confident that there will target? We were never in any way wedded to 1 be a decent return to the national lottery in due course million. Do I think there is a facilities improvement from land sales? programme that targets small community clubs which Hugh Robertson: Yes, and I say this having spent had, for reasons we all understand, missed out on the seven years, before I came into Parliament, working previous old sport plans because sport governing in the property department at Schroders, and values of bodies very sensibly targeted key target clubs? This the very large property portfolio we held on behalf of was to reach those small community clubs that cannot institutional pension funds went up and down and up afford a new roof, a new boiler or new showers. Every and down over that seven-year period. If you looked single person sitting around this table has such at land values in and around Stratford in the 2007 to football clubs, cricket clubs and rugby clubs in their 2009 period, they were at a certain level. If you look constituency that are struggling to get £25,000 for a at the basic land value now, it is at a different level. new roof. Is it a key part of the London 2012 legacy If you look at the land value at any time between 2013 that we should reach down to that level and try to and 2020, it is going to be a number of different levels help those people improve the experience of sport for within that. That was why, when answering the earlier people who play there and get new members on the question, I said it is dependent on land values, but on back of it? Absolutely it is. Will that play into the a prudent and reasonable reading, yes, we are active people numbers in due course? Yes, it will. Is confident that that £675 million will be repaid. it doing so now? No, it isn’t, because those alterations have not yet been made. Q379 Damian Collins: I have just one brief question on that. I know the intention is that the Olympic Q381 Steve Rotheram: Has the target been stadium will be leased to providers, but have you abandoned? given any consideration to, if there were a future offer Hugh Robertson: The 1 million target has been to buy the stadium, whether there should be something abandoned, yes. built into that agreement that might give the Jeremy Hunt: I wonder if I can just put those Exchequer some further recompense in the future? I comments in a broader context. The 1 million target know there has been some criticism—for example, of was a target by the last Government. A fair assessment the City of Manchester stadium—that substantial of the last Government’s approach to this was that profits were made by the initial owners of the club they put a lot of effort into programmes that would and the stadium when it was sold on to its current boost sports participation but the indicators never owners, and maybe some of that money should come really changed direction and, since 2005, in terms of back to the Treasury. youth participation, the figures have gone down by cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence Ev 65
24 January 2012 Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Hugh Robertson MP and Jonathan Stephens
2%. Obviously the bulk of that period was under the be, we would hope, picked up in the Active People last Government. survey. We are absolutely committed to the promise made by Seb Coe in 2005 that we would use hosting the Games Q383 Steve Rotheram: Am I wrong to think that it to get a lasting increase in sports participation. Part of is just more than 100,000 people to date who have that is the Places People Play scheme, which we can participated? tell the Committee today that, as a result of the Hugh Robertson: As a result of Places People Play, changes that this Government made to the lottery and yes, I would think that is an incorrect figure because the increasing lottery ticket sales, the amount of I don’t see at this stage how you could possibly—I money going into grass roots sport over the next five don’t know where you got that figure from, so I am years will be £500 million more than was predicted at slightly pitching into the dark, but given that this is a the time of the election in 2010. That will be a huge grant programme that started last year—they had gone increase in funding going to boost community sports out to the market, they had invited the applications, facilities and also to support our top athletes as well. they had taken them back in, they had assessed them, But on top of that there are two other elements that they are giving out the cheques at the moment— we hope will make a real difference. First of all is the indeed, there will probably be some people around Olympic-style school sports competition and School this table—one of the things that we were very keen Games, which I am delighted has cross-party support. to do was to get local MPs involved in giving these We have now signed up more than half the schools in sort of grants. I know that process is ongoing at the England to that. The whole point of that competition moment, so I don’t yet know how you could have is that it will be something that does not just happen come to that figure. in 2012 but it happens in 2013, 2014, 2015 and for Steve Rotheram: It was in December Sport England many years to come. confirmed that that was the figure to date. One small example of why that programme will be an Hugh Robertson: Is that their target— incredibly important programme is, for many of those Dr Coffey: That is from their up-to-date survey. schools, they will be doing Paralympic sport for the Hugh Robertson: So that have earmarked that first time, which will make a massive difference to particularly for the iconic strain of Places People Play, disabled children in those school. Then a final element or have they said that is an aspiration for the increase is the Youth Sports Strategy that Hugh and I out of the whole scheme? announced the week before last, and in that we are Steve Rotheram: No, they said that 108,000 seeking to address this perennial problem that a third additional adults had taken up some sport. Hugh Robertson: of 15-year-olds who actively play sport stop playing Yes, but that may be as part of the general Active People data, not particularly tied to sport after they pass their 16th birthday because they Places People Play. leave school. Around 6,500 satellite sports clubs will be set up in secondary schools around the country by Q384 Steve Rotheram: What is the Government the FA, the RFU, Football League, cricket and tennis doing to address the effectiveness of that particular to try to get links between schools and community Places People Play project? sports clubs. If you take all those together, I think we Hugh Robertson: The three things I spoke about have a very good chance of reversing the change in beforehand. As part of the case they have to put in to youth participation, which is partly caused by societal get funding, they have to show how that is going to factors—people spending a lot more time watching increase participation. Sport England, when they have TV and screens in general—and delivering on the made the grant and then do their post-grant checks, promise that Seb Coe made in 2005. will assess whether that is the case. All the people that we hope will take up sport as a result of that will then Q382 Steve Rotheram: I think everybody would get fed into the Active People survey. welcome the announcement from the Secretary of State of additional funding for those schools and Q385 Steve Rotheram: Given that was Sport community groups, but we were talking specifically England’s own figures, are you confident that they can about this initiative and the £135 million. What deliver that part of the Olympic legacy? analysis has been done on the spend to date and how Hugh Robertson: Yes. I am absolutely confident that effective that has been with its limited impact, and the Active People figures are independent. The worry how much is left? about them is that they are so independent and Hugh Robertson: The simple answer to that is, as part catholic with a small “c” and it is such a high bar that of the application process, anybody applying—and they are measured against—three separate incidences just checking the figures, there have 633 applications of sport a week—that there is quite a lot of activity for the small grant bit of it. That historically compares going on that is not picked up by that measurement very well with programmes that Sport England have target. I am absolutely convinced that the run, so it tells you that this is hitting the mark. measurement system has integrity, yes, and it is As part of the application process, people have to entirely independent and all those sorts of things. The make an estimate of the increase in participation that big question is whether it is picking up everything that will flow from new showers, new boilers, new roofs, is happening. new changing rooms or whatever it is going to be. When Sport England go back to them, that is then Q386 Steve Rotheram: Despite the measure itself, tested and all the people who are playing would then there is £135 million allocated to spend on this. Surely cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Ev 66 Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence
24 January 2012 Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Hugh Robertson MP and Jonathan Stephens you need some comfort that you are going to get value number like that. When we relooked at the issue, we for money on that, so if it is not 1 million, what is the decided that a better way to target public money and new target? to target the efforts of all the people involved in what Hugh Robertson: You absolutely do need some we all consider to be a very important project, which comfort on it and it is a perfectly reasonable point to is getting more people to play sport, is to focus on make, but it is perfectly reasonable for that comfort to young people and focus on getting them to have sport come from within the overall measurement target that as a habit for life. That is why we have changed the Sport England uses to increase participation in sport. approach. We have not instituted a new target, but There is a counter danger, which is that, if you over- we think people will be able to measure very clearly assess and all the rest of it, it will cost a whole lot whether there is an increase in young people who have more to do. These are small £50,000 grants that go to sport as a habit for life. We have said what we boilers and roofs and showers, and all your sports consider the definition of that to be, and it is with that clubs will very quickly start complaining about the in mind that we have designed these three vast increase in bureaucracy that is required to access programmes, not just the expansion of funding for what is, after all, quite a small grant, so it is a question community sport facilities but also the work we are of balance between the two. doing in schools and also to link schools to Jeremy Hunt: Could I just add a small point to what community sport facilities, which we hope will lead Mr Rotheram said? We did think about whether we to some really good improvements. were getting into a game of “your target is better than my target” when we looked at the 1 million target that clearly was not going to be delivered when we came Q388 Damian Collins: Has removing that target to office, and I think it got to just over 100,000. We given you more flexibility over the type of schemes decided that a better objective was to say that we you could support? For example, I understand that wanted to increase the number of people who did DCMS did not give financial support directly to Kick, sport, the number of young people who developed the premier league football programme, because it sport as a habit for life, and we have a fairly clear was not a programme designed to increase definition of sport as a habit for life for those people participation but instead to deal with issues related to who actively play sport at the age of 16, 18 and 24. crime and antisocial behaviour in communities. We thought that if people played sport at those three Jeremy Hunt: I think the Home Office is the primary moments in their life, there is a good chance they will funder of that programme. But again, what we have develop sport as a habit for life. not done with this new youth sports strategy is In terms of accountability, at the moment it is about required all the money in whole sports plans to be 51% of 24-year-olds who actively play sport, and we devoted to the new strategy because we recognise that would be looking for an increase in that number, but there are very good programmes, whether it is bowls we decided not to pick another target. Obviously, if it or swimming or programmes for the over 60s, which is not a substantive increase, we would be very are excellent programmes, and we do not want people disappointed, but the point I want to make is we are to stop supporting those programmes but we do want measuring very carefully. The problem with the 1 the focus of efforts to be on getting more young million target is that it did have slightly the feel of a people having sport as a habit for life. random target, a nice number but a random target, and we did not want to just take that with another Q389 Damian Collins: Do you think there needs to randomly chosen number, so we decided this was a be greater co-ordination within Government on better way of measuring overall success. different programmes for sport? For different reasons, Jonathan Stephens: If I may, just to clarify, the sporting programmes are supported by the Home 110,000 figure is the Sport England figure for the Office, the Ministry of Justice, your Department, the increase in adult participation between 2008–09, when Department for Health, the Department for the original baseline was set, and 2010–11, so it Communities and Local Government and the covers entirely a period before Places People Play. Department for Education. Is there enough co- ordination between all those Departments? Should Q387 Damian Collins: I suppose I should state for there even be—and I do not have a view of whom it the record that Sport England has made grants to the sports centre in Folkestone and in Hythe, and the should be—a lead Minister that oversees all those refurbished sports centre opens in next month. So, if programmes? anybody wants to come and see how the money has Jeremy Hunt: There can always be better co- been spent, you are more than welcome to come and ordination, better “joined-up Government” as have a look. My first question is, was a flat target of someone once said, but we are working very hard. I 1 million people participating in sport the wrong target know Hugh works very hard on a cross-departmental to start off with, or should it have been a more focused basis. target looking at areas where the Government has a I will give one example where I think we have made more strategic interest in getting more people involved some progress. The Department of Health has agreed in sport? that increasing sports participation should be a public Jeremy Hunt: I think we all learn from when these health objective for the new devolved responsibilities things happen, and I think there was a randomness of local authorities who are going to be implementing about the number chosen and you also sometimes the public health agenda, and I think that is a positive have great reverse incentives when you have a big step forward. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence Ev 67
24 January 2012 Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Hugh Robertson MP and Jonathan Stephens
Q390 Damian Collins: I just wanted to ask a East, which I am going to on Thursday, and we are question briefly on a different legacy area, on the absolutely determined to make sure that everywhere business legacy. UKFD, I think, has taken the lead in embraces the opportunities of 2012. creating the business embassy that will be running I have to say that there is a lot of enthusiasm for doing during the period of the Olympic Games. Is that this. A year ago, there was a degree of cynicism about something your department has been involved with as this being a moment for London and the South East. part of your efforts leading on the Olympics I think that really has changed. If you go to places themselves? like Yorkshire, there is incredible excitement about the Jeremy Hunt: Yes. In fact, a really good example of opportunities that we are going to have, and it is not cross-Government co-ordination that has never something the Government can deliver on our own, happened before but I hope will now become a but I think the fact that we have launched this permanent feature following 2012 has been that the campaign has given people encouragement that this is British Council, UKTI and Visit Britain have come something we really have to go for. together to do a single campaign to promote what the UK has to offer, whether to a tourist, a student or an Q393 Mr Sanders: The last Government produced a inward investor, under one campaign, which is called document, “Legacy Promises”, which outlined the The Great Campaign. You have probably seen the goals of the legacy project. One of the promises was posters around the place. That has, I think, worked to make the Olympic Park a blueprint for sustainable extremely well and there has been a lot of focus on living, with 80% of the park’s energy coming from that. There has been a lot of effort, particularly in the non-renewable sources. Is that still a goal? last three to four months, on boosting the business and Jonathan Stephens: I am sorry, I don’t know on that tourism legacy from the Games. We have a plan to particular promise, but what I do know is that the get an extra 4.5 million tourists to the UK. If we get Commission for Sustainable London, the independent this right, this summer will confirm London’s position expert body that reviews progress against the as the cultural and sporting capital of Europe as well sustainability goals, has published recent reports as the business capital of Europe, and that is a very, showing that almost all, if not all, of the goals very big prize to go for. originally set for the development of the park have been met. Q391 Damian Collins: Are there any results to date Mr Sanders: Is it possible to let us have something for The Great Campaign? Is it a success or— in writing on that? It was a specific target and, if it is Jeremy Hunt: It only started this month. I appreciate being met, that is fantastic. the new trend in Government with the NAO Jonathan Stephens: Sure. examining the Work Programme when it has only just started, and we read all about it this morning. There Q394 Philip Davies: is this new trend to examine programmes when they I want to come on to security, have only just started. We don’t have any results yet, but just before I do, Hugh, on sporting legacy, an idea but we have publicly said we have some very clear that you floated, I think, about three years ago, which objectives whereby people will be able to see whether I thought was a great idea at the time and I have we have been successful. championed ever since—I fear to little avail—was Hugh Robertson: That is absolutely the case. There that, when sports were being broadcast at the Olympic are already results. You can already clearly see the Games, we had a little strip at the bottom of the extent to which the London 2012 project has changed programme to say, “Judo is on at the moment. To find the way that the international sports world approaches. out where your nearest judo club is, please contact We would not have won the World Athletics this number or go on this website,” or whatever it Championships had we not been bidding for it against might be, because you have a short window of the background of London 2012, because international opportunity to get people into these things, which I sports bodies now believe that we deliver what we thought was a fantastic idea. I just wonder if you promise. That has not always been the case, and that could tell us if you have made any headway with the brings in its wake a £100 million boost to the broadcasters on this. London economy. Hugh Robertson: I am championing it still, is the short answer, and I am seeing the BBC next month, Q392 Damian Collins: Finally, the inward and item 1 on the agenda is what they were going to investment into the UK from overseas might be a do. To be fair to the BBC, they have been hit by a measure that we might look at, and that is something number of legacy programmes and, of course, they that regions of the country have a strategic interest in have their own Big Splash programme to try to get as well, particularly authorities like mine in Kent kids to go to swimming. I absolutely think that, where there is an enterprise zone for investment. Are whether it is by the red button or whether it is there opportunities, or could there be opportunities, something that happens underneath, something that for regions where there are enterprise zones to be part signposted people from the action they see in front of of the work of the business embassy and have a them to the nearest possible place so they could give chance through the Olympic Games to demonstrate it a go might well—if I say it would transform it, it is what they have to offer to overseas investors? probably over-egging it, isn’t it? But it could make a Jeremy Hunt: Absolutely, and I have been going the considerable contribution to this. All I can do this length and breadth of the country in the last three morning is give you my word that I will continue to months. I have been to every region bar the North push this as hard as possible. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Ev 68 Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence
24 January 2012 Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Hugh Robertson MP and Jonathan Stephens
Q395 Philip Davies: Good luck, because I think it is Q399 Philip Davies: Given that we have volunteers a great idea. On security, initially we were told that and we have private security guards, and we have the we needed 10,000 people for the venue security. We Army, what plans have been put in place to make sure appear to be now—correct me if I am wrong— that they are all effectively co-ordinated? around 23,700. Hugh Robertson: As we sit here having these Hugh Robertson: Correct, yes. hearings, the private security guards are being Philip Davies: Can you explain why the first estimate recruited by the contractor G4S. They sit alongside was so shocking? LOCOG in the Organising Committee headquarters. Hugh Robertson: Yes, because it was done on the Alongside them are those in the Army who are basis of figures that were lifted from the Manchester responsible for doing it. Alongside them are the Commonwealth Games and from previous Olympics police. The thing is entirely co-ordinated now to where it was possible to make a realistic estimate. prevent precisely the problems that you are That turned out to be less than the numbers required in suggesting. the post-7/7, post-operational planning environment. Q400 Philip Davies: The final thing I want to Q396 Philip Davies: It seems to me that the security mention on security is e-Borders, because the e- is potentially the biggest threat to the Olympics Borders programme, if it is done properly, like it is in Games and also the biggest threat to the budgets of Australia, is a fantastic method of making sure that the Olympic Games. How confident are you that it is only legitimate people come into the country and that not going to increase again from 23,700? the people who are on a terrorist watch list, for Hugh Robertson: The experience of 10 years in the example, do not get into the country. It prevents them Army tells you can never be utterly and absolutely from boarding the plane in the first place. It does not confident about security costs because it is a moving just deal with the problem when they get here, it piece. I often say this to people. If you ever want a prevents people from getting on the plane and getting chilling reminder of what we are dealing with here, here in the first place. That project, which should have just remember what Gerry Adams always used to say been in place years ago, still is not in place, and I just when I was a young soldier in Londonderry in the late wondered what you were doing to agitate the Home 1980s, that the British Army has to be lucky every Office to get an effective e-Borders programme in time. We only have to be lucky once. You are dealing place in time for the Olympics. with some very high-tech threats here. Hugh Robertson: The Secretary of State has been That said, having been through this process, I always dealing directly with the Home Office about that, so I thought this would be the sort of last big financial will hand that over to the Secretary of State. pillar to get in place. I am absolutely as confident as Jeremy Hunt: The Home Office is doing everything I possibly can be at this stage, having burrowed down it can to make sure that we have secure borders in into this, person by person, venue by venue, gate by obviously a very critical time, and I am having regular gate, that 23,700 is absolutely the maximum demand discussions with the Home Secretary about a whole on peak days. That is not a constant figure running range of things that make it possible to do that, but through the process. That is the maximum demand on the security and the integrity of our borders is an peak days. We now have a much better method, a absolutely necessary underpinning of everything that much less risky method of covering that, with a we do. contribution from the military, a contribution from the private security industry, contribution from Q401 Philip Davies: In those discussions, have any volunteers, a contribution from Bridging the Gap. You discussions taken place of the e-Borders programme, are not looking for them all from one source, which or have you had any assurances from the Home Office would increase the risk of doing that. That has about where we are up to with that? presented a balanced security plan and a viable Jeremy Hunt: It is part of what we discussed, but the budget. So, the answer to your question is yes, I am whole issue of the security of the borders is more than confident as we can be. that, such as the management of the queues at immigration, and by thinking it through sufficiently in Q397 Philip Davies: Can you just clarify, out of advance we are determined to minimise any potential those, exactly how many of the private security guards risks to national security, which is our number one will be needed? priority. Hugh Robertson: I don’t know if we have the actual figures. We are getting 7,500 from the military and the Q402 Philip Davies: Would you not accept it would remainder will come from a division of the other be bizarre, given how effectively, for example, three. Australia uses the e-Borders programme, not to have it in place in time for the Olympic Games? We have Q398 Philip Davies: Are they confident that G4S known this has been coming for years. It seems to me will be able to recruit— that it would be absolutely ludicrous if it did not come Hugh Robertson: Yes. It is much, much better to do into place until after the Olympic Games, given the it this way than to ask under the previous plan, where fact that we have all accepted that security is one of the private security industry was going to make up the the biggest threats to the Games. whole of the shortfall. That clearly introduces an extra Jeremy Hunt: The extent to which it will be in place level of risk that is not there if you use the military to is, I am afraid, something you will have to ask the make up some of that shortfall. Home Secretary, but I know that she is fully engaged cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence Ev 69
24 January 2012 Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Hugh Robertson MP and Jonathan Stephens with issues around Olympic security. In fact, I think Q405 Damian Collins: What level of contingency is she is giving a speech on Olympic security tomorrow. there in the plans? For example, one of the areas that I know that it is an absolute priority for her to make are contentious for my constituents in Kent and people sure that we have efficient processing of people in southeast London is the northbound approach to through the borders, but also that they maintain safe the Blackwall Tunnel, which is already a traffic and and secure borders as well. accident hotspot area. If there are accidents in the Philip Davies: Maybe you could ask her to add a Olympic lanes, are there contingency plans for other chapter on e-Borders to her speech tomorrow. routes that might be used or will people just have to Jeremy Hunt: Or indeed maybe you could. cope? Jonathan Stephens: Of course TfL have contingency plans to keep the traffic moving at normal times and, Q403 Steve Rotheram: I think everybody would of course, they have two objectives here. One is to absolutely agree that security has to be the number obviously facilitate the essential traffic that is essential one priority, but also you want people who go to the to the Games, but the other very important objective Games to enjoy it and to have a wonderful experience is to make sure that business as usual for as much as as well. I am just wondering, for those volunteers— the rest of London goes on as usual. They estimate the point that I perhaps wanted to pick up on before that something like 70% of the usual traffic from when you said that London would be a cultural London will not be affected by the Games. 30%, they capital, I will dispute that one, because you know that think, will be affected, and some of that very Liverpool is the European cultural capital. But we got significantly, possibly severely, which is why they are lots and lots of volunteers, as you will be aware, and trying to raise awareness so that people can plan we put on specific training, and that included the taxi alternatives and plan around that. drivers as well, so that when people came into the One of the things they put out to the public are the city it was all about making that experience the most hotspots, as it were, the particular points of focus and enjoyable that those people could possibly have. Is congestion, be it on the road network or the Tube there something similar going on with training network or whatever, again to begin to raise awareness volunteers now? and business and among individuals as to the Jeremy Hunt: There is a huge amount of work going particular areas to avoid and the particular days and on, right down to training Tube drivers to make sure times to avoid, because this will be a constantly that we make Tube passengers feel particularly changing picture. As the Secretary of State said, it is welcome in this special period for London, so we not a message about, “Don’t come into London; it will absolutely are doing that. all be congested”, it is very much a picture of, “Think The other message that we absolutely want to get about where you are travelling, think about when you across is that this is not a time to stay away from are travelling, look at the information available and London, this is a time to come to London. This is see how you can adapt or change your journeys if you going to be one of the most exciting years in London’s need to”. history and you will kick yourself if you were not here. It will take a bit longer to get around—of course Q406 Damian Collins: Has TfL raised any concerns there are going to be more people on the tubes, trains with you about this? If you look at some of the and buses—but it is going to be a fantastic summer Olympic lanes, they also sit very neatly on some of with a huge amount happening, and we want to do the worst traffic hotspots in the city, such as everything we can to make people feel welcome and Hammersmith Flyover, Hanger Lane, Blackwall give people the confidence that, if they do come, they Tunnel. There are big, strategic issues about traffic will have an enjoyable experience. flows going through there normally, but when you are reserving lanes of traffic for Olympic-only traffic, it is just going to make that a lot worse. Q404 Damian Collins: I want to ask about the Jonathan Stephens: I should be clear that the Olympic Route Network. What sort of detailed Olympic Route Network is just over 100 miles or so consultations have the Government had with people of roads, most of which will not have reserved lanes that use the Olympic lanes at the moment as part of on it. Only about a third of it has reserved lanes, so their daily habit of getting in and out of the city and the rest of the Olympic Route Network is all about around it? speeding traffic up on that network so that TfL can Jonathan Stephens: There has been an extremely achieve the reliability that is a key part of the Games detailed process of consultation led by Transport for promise. It is things like removing unnecessary right- London, who is responsible for the operation of the hand turns, speeding up the phasing of traffic lights, transport system generally but in particular the taking out unnecessary parking or pedestrian Olympic Route Network during the Olympics. All the crossings. plans are open and available on their website. In Damian Collins: We could keep that. That could be addition, TfL have been through and are going part of the Olympic legacy. through a process of extensive engagement with Jonathan Stephens: When I was present at the Public business of all sizes, large business, SMEs, and they Accounts Committee, one of your colleagues who are beginning their process of public engagement and drove in from Thurrock asked how much extra time public awareness-raising next week in preparation for would be added, and the Commissioner for Transport the public’s role in helping to manage demand during for London said, “If you are travelling on a Games the Games. network, you might find your journey is faster”. By cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Ev 70 Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence
24 January 2012 Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Hugh Robertson MP and Jonathan Stephens comparison, of course, if you are crossing an Olympic it is also worth stressing that sponsors by and large Route Network, you may find it slower. are also key suppliers to the Games—like Atos is There will be nowhere where a Games-only lane is providing a lot of the IT infrastructure; Visa is the whole of the Olympic Route Network. The providing the payments infrastructure—so they have Games-only lanes only exist where there are two lanes key workers who are also an essential part of making on the road, so there will always be the opportunity the Olympics work. Those key workers will have for ordinary traffic to go alongside the Games-only access to the ORN but they will generally be, if they lanes, which only take up about a third of the overall are using it, in coaches, and we reckon that on a daily network. basis only about 4,000 workers associated with the sponsors will be using the Games network, which is Q407 Damian Collins: Everyone will have their own only about 10% of the total usage we anticipate on areas in mind, but my concern is for something like the network. the Blackwall Tunnel. If one of the three approach lanes is reserved for Olympic traffic only, that is Q410 Mrs Mensch: What is the state of the already very, very badly congested and I think what Government’s discussions with London taxi drivers is demonstrated at the moment is, if there was an and the organisations that represent them? I have accident or an emergency on one of these routes, it received many representations from taxi drivers who, causes chaos over a very large area of the city because as you know, wish to be allowed to use the reserve the infrastructure isn’t good enough to cope with it. I lanes and are not going to be allowed to use the am able to appreciate it is not going to be business as reserve lanes, who are saying that during the Games usual while the Games are on, but I suppose there are traffic will be so unmanageable that they are going to still concerns about the level of contingency that go on holiday en masse and, therefore, that section of exists within the plan as it stands. London that uses taxis will be crammed on to general Jonathan Stephens: Keeping essential routes open, London transportation, thus exacerbating the obviously one cannot prevent accidents or transportation problems that we can anticipate during breakdowns happening, but getting routes reopened the Games. What is the state of the discussions with and flowing smoothly again as quickly as possible is taxi drivers, and do you regard this as a credible threat one of TfL’s main priorities. You mentioned earlier that London will lose its taxi service during the Hammersmith Flyover, and TfL have been closely in Olympics because they are not allowed to use the touch with us to keep us up to date on their plans for dedicated routes? that, and the Mayor and TfL have announced their Jonathan Stephens: No is the short answer to that. plans to make sure that the flyover is open again to The discussions are led by TfL, and on the points of traffic on a normal basis before the Games. detail about their discussions you would have to talk to TfL, but what we hear from them is confidence that Q408 Damian Collins: I have a couple more taxi drivers will play a key and close to normal part questions and then I think my colleague wants to of their role in getting people around London. come on this topic as well. There has been some Mrs Mensch: You have had no threats from those debate about the rights emergency vehicles have to organisations that represent taxi drivers that they are use the Olympic Route Network. Will emergency going to down tools during the Olympics if they are vehicles only be able to use Olympic venue lanes if not allowed to use the lanes? they are on emergency callouts, or will they be able Jonathan Stephens: They did not say anything about to use them generally to get around the city? various representations and threats. Of course, Jonathan Stephens: I think I had better write to you everyone is interested in assessing the impact on this, on that. I know that it will be available to emergency but this is also a good business opportunity for them vehicles, but I am not sure exactly the latest, so let us as well. TfL is confident that they will play their write to you. normal and important role in getting people around London. Q409 Damian Collins: I know there has been concern about emergency service vehicles that may Q411 Steve Rotheram: You are absolutely right to not be on emergency callouts but nevertheless want to get people in and out of stadia as quickly as possible, get around the city efficiently, and whether they can but with increased traffic volumes and increased use those lanes or not. speeds come dangers. I have read somewhere, and I Just finally, there has been some debate about whether can’t dig it out or I would quote it to you, but is it true Olympic sponsors should have access to some of the there has been some modelling done and that there Olympic Route Network as well. I believe even the are estimates that there will be increased pedestrian current Secretary of Defence raised this when he was accidents and fatalities along the Olympic route? Chancellor Secretary. Is that simply something that Jonathan Stephens: I have not see any such the Government has no control over and is decided by estimates. I am not aware of any. the IOC as part of their agreement with the host city, Hugh Robertson: Along the Olympic Route or is that something the Government has discretion Network? over? Steve Rotheram: The network, sorry. Jonathan Stephens: It is part of the host city contract Hugh Robertson: Not pedestrian places like the park, and it is part of what sponsors buy, as it were, when because we have done some extensive modelling on they contribute the very significant sums they are pedestrian flows and indeed we authorised some extra contributing to the LOCOG budget. At the same time, expenditure precisely to take out such a pinch point. I cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence Ev 71
24 January 2012 Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Hugh Robertson MP and Jonathan Stephens just wonder whether what you picked up was a particular hotspot? Use the bus rather than the tube if reflection of that but, if it is on the Olympic Route the tube is particularly congested on a particular day.” Network, that is not what you were after. Again, sometimes it may be about encouraging people Steve Rotheram: Olympic Route Network, sorry, just to stay in London for longer. TfL have had very good to clarify. If that was to be the case—and if I can dig discussions with Canary Wharf, where there is a large it up, I will share that with you—what would you be number of important businesses, where large numbers doing to try to negate as near as possible those sorts of employees are based, and they are thinking very of issues? actively about how to create lots of opportunities for Jonathan Stephens: TfL are responsible for the safety staff to stay on after the working day with TV screens, of all the road users, pedestrians, cyclists and drivers, entertainment locally to participate in and watch the and take that part of their responsibility very seriously, Games, and, as a result, stagger their journeys home so we would expect them to look at all the possible to help demand management. It is very much about measures to reduce risk of accidents. amending your journey. Jeremy Hunt: We will look into it. The civil service is playing its part. Virtually all Government Departments have signed up to an Q412 Chair: Could I quickly just turn to public objective to reduce their travel patterns during the transport? There are obviously going to be huge extra Games. This is being led by the Department for pressures on public transport in London. We were told Transport, which trialled this with their own staff last year and altered 69% of their staff journeys in a two- in a letter from John Armitt immediately before week period. I think it is capable of being done. Christmas that it is intended that working with businesses should achieve an anticipated reduction of 20% in the total number of journeys achieved as a Q414 Chair: Have you studied what happened on the result of the changed travel patterns. Are you first day of the new Millennium in terms of the travel confident that that figure can be achieved? arrangements for visiting the Millennium Dome for the celebrations there? Jeremy Hunt: We are confident, but I think the Jeremy Hunt: It is engraved on my brain, Mr important point to make about that message—it you Chairman. look at other Olympic host cities, Vancouver needed Chair: I thought it might be. I think there might be to get a 30% reduction in traffic and they managed to some lessons to be learnt from that. achieve a 35% reduction. The key message we want Jeremy Hunt: Indeed. to get across is, “Don’t stay away from London. Come to London”. Where it comes to specific pinch points, we are Q415 Steve Rotheram: We were very fortunate we working with specific businesses, particularly in the had a tour of the Olympic Park last week, which was Canary Wharf area, where we think that there may be very exciting. This question was raised with John some particular pressures. The Jubilee Line, London Armitt, who I think you know well, and he gave a robust defence of the plans for the stadium wrap. As Bridge Station, the Central Line, Bond Street and Chair, Secretary of State, of the Olympic Board, do Bank Station are going to be particularly busy. It will you think it is appropriate for London 2012 to be so still be possible to get through them. It may take a closely associated with a company like Dow little bit longer. It may be quicker to avoid Chemicals? interchanges at those stations over the summer, but Jeremy Hunt: Obviously it is a decision for LOCOG, those are the kind of changes in travel patterns that are but it is a decision that, as a result of the controversy completely normal. We are working with particular that we had last autumn, I looked into very carefully. businesses in particular locations on a targeted basis, After looking at it very carefully, I decided that I but what we want to avoid is a generalised message, wholeheartedly supported the decisions that LOCOG because I think that would suggest that we wanted had taken. people not to come to London in a period where, Dow is an IOC top sponsor. The ethical practices of frankly, they will want to be here, and to go out in the our sponsors are very important matters, but it is also evening after work in the most exciting city in the something that is looked into exhaustively by the IOC world over those six weeks will be a wonderful thing before they make someone a top sponsor. The fact for many London workers to do. that, as you will know, they did not own Union Carbide at the time of the Bhopal disaster in 1985 Q413 Chair: A 20% reduction is a huge number, and nor at the time of a final settlement with the Indian for those people you are essentially saying, “Stay Government in 1989—that has been upheld three away”, aren’t you? times in the Indian Supreme Court—makes me Jeremy Hunt: Yes, but only on a targeted basis. This confident that it was a very reasonable decision. isn’t every business in London, this is businesses in In terms of the sustainability considerations, they particular locations and that is over the summer passed with flying colours as being much the best holiday period as well. Jonathan, do you want to solution. I just have a wider concern that, at a time come in? when corporate practices are very much under the Jonathan Stephens: I was just going to add that it is spotlight for all sorts of reasons that are not related to not just about simply avoiding journeys. That may be the Olympics, we have a third of the cost of staging a part of it, but it is also about, “Can you travel at a the Games being borne by corporate sponsors, and different time? Can you change your route slightly those are companies that are doing the right thing. and just walk the last bit of your route to avoid a They are supporting sporting events, they are reducing cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Ev 72 Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence
24 January 2012 Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Hugh Robertson MP and Jonathan Stephens the cost to taxpayers and they are doing something particularly in respect to business, or to represent and that is of extraordinary benefit to the country, and I celebrate UK sporting success. would not want to send a signal out to corporate sponsors that we do not value what they do. Q420 Mr Sutcliffe: Can we move on now to the thorny issue of Games tickets and the issues around Q416 Steve Rotheram: I am sure we do value it. there? The Government has bought a number of Anyone who has corporate social responsibility also Games tickets for business leaders and dignitaries. is to be applauded, but you may not think that there Can you give us description of who that might be? is a case to answer, and others have put that forward, Jonathan Stephens: The principles here we are but how about the potential reputational damage to seeking to apply are, first, to maximise the benefit to the Games? the UK from hosting the Games, but secondly and Jeremy Hunt: We are a free country, and I think it is very importantly to make sure that the maximum a very important part of our Olympics that we tell the number of tickets are available to the public for their world that we are a country that allows protests and use and access. Thirdly, we want to make sure that that allows a democratic debate about all the decisions we are completely transparent in our use of tickets. taken with respect to hosting the Olympics. I defend Applying those principles, all top sponsors were to the hilt the right of anyone to challenge decisions entitled to 13,500 ticket allocations. Right from the that have been made by the Government or by start, the Government decided not to take up its full LOCOG or anyone associated with the Olympic allocation, so we purchased about 8,800 at a cost of project, but I have to say, in this particular case, after just under £750,000. Roughly 3,000 of those we set looking at the issues in enormous detail—the Bhopal aside to make available for people who have worked tragedy was an appalling tragedy and there is consistently on the Games to make them a success absolutely no question that there was an appalling over a significant period of time to purchase at cost human cost—I do not believe that Dow were value—not free, but to purchase at cost value. responsible and I think we should support them as a We originally made about 3,000 tickets available. We company that wants to do the right thing by have only allocated 2,300 of those. Another 2,000 or supporting a project that will be of huge benefit to so we purchased on behalf of host local authorities the country. outside of London, the venues such as Weymouth or football venues outside of London, for them to host dignitaries and visiting guests. The number available Q417 Steve Rotheram: Secretary of State, is this a to the Government to host guests is around 3,300. We case of you just belligerently ploughing on regardless, have not yet taken final decisions on how to use those. or have you done any analysis of the damage that this We expect most of them will be associated very could do to the Games? closely with the various business promotion efforts, Jeremy Hunt: Of course, if people wish to protest— the business conference, the exporters’ conference that that attracts publicity—that is something may be with will be associated around the Games and, of course, us for a while in the run-up to the Games, but I think as we firm up our plans and review them with the it is also important in these situations to be clear about other departments closely involved, such as the your principles. The IOC and LOCOG and the Foreign Office, as and when we find that we have Government have all looked very carefully at that tickets that we do not need we will return them to decision and we think that ethically it was the right make them available to the public. decision to take. We welcome sponsorship from ethically and morally responsible companies. It would Q421 Mr Sutcliffe: Earlier, you talked about buying be the wrong thing to make a hasty decision on the tickets for the staff for the opening and closing basis that I have outlined and on the basis of pretty ceremonies. Will that be on a similar sort of basis in exhaustive examination of the decisions that were terms of making sure that those people who have made by LOCOG and which we fully support. worked on the project get the opportunity to go to the opening and closing ceremonies? Q418 Mr Sutcliffe: We move now to corporate Jonathan Stephens: Yes. I should be clear that the hospitality and issues around that and the tickets for staff do not include any tickets for opening Government’s role in all this. Can we first of all and closing ceremonies. Indeed, the value of all such confirm that LOCOG will recover the costs of the VIP tickets is between £40 and £90, and staff are centre from the IOC and the sponsors? purchasing those at face value. Jonathan Stephens: Yes, that is entirely met from private funds from LOCOG’s budget. There is no Q422 Mr Sutcliffe: I do not know if this is an oddity public funding going into that at all. or not, but you can explain why there seems to be a strong interest in beach volleyball among Ministers Q419 Mr Sutcliffe: Who from Government will have and civil servants? The Government have bought 410 access to the VIP lounges? beach volleyball tickets, costing £26,000, as against Jonathan Stephens: We haven’t taken final decisions only 256 athletics tickets. I think the Chairman has a on this, but we are very clear that participation by few tickets as well. Government Ministers or officials will only be where Jonathan Stephens: I thought that was an oddity, there is a strict working justification for it, and in myself. The explanation is an interesting one. When particular where there is a clear need either to we were purchasing tickets for staff to purchase, we represent the UK or to advance the UK’s interest, thought they are mostly going to be able to go at the cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence Ev 73
24 January 2012 Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, Hugh Robertson MP and Jonathan Stephens weekend or on Friday, and when you look at what is Chair: I think we have exhausted all our questions, available at those sorts of price bands on those days, so I thank the three of you very much. most of it turns out to be volleyball. As ever on these occasions, the explanation is coincidence rather than conspiracy.
Written evidence submitted by the Olympic Delivery Authority
RE: TRANSPORT INFORMATION FOR CMS COMMITTEE
I write following your request for further information on the transport network ahead of the Olympic and Paralympic Games next summer.
Transport for London (TfL) has published very detailed transport “hotspot” information covering London’s roads and public transport network. This information was published on TfL’s website in September 2011 and is available at www.tfl.gov.uk/2012.
The information includes tube station “hotspot” maps and travel advice for the 30 most affected stations, and is based on the latest data and information TfL has available. Detailed station descriptions have been produced that show impact at these stations throughout each day of the Games, and at half-hour intervals. It includes projected waiting time to board a service.
The information shows the impact at stations if nothing was done to manage the demand from Games spectators and regular customers, taking into account seasonal demand patterns. Importantly, it also shows how the impact is alleviated when an anticipated reduction of 20% in the total number of journeys is achieved as a result of changed travel patterns at these locations. This reduction is based on work being undertaken by TfL and London 2012 in consultation with businesses, who already expect and have planned that some staff will not travel at these times and locations as they will be working at another location, working from home, taking holiday—perhaps to attend the Games as a spectator—or working longer hours, but fewer days in each week.
For many station “hotspots”, this reduction in journeys significantly addresses the impact of the Games, other than on particularly busy days and times. For a few stations, a significant challenge remains and TfL is continuing to work with local employers to ensure they understand the impacts, can plan ahead and that we can further mitigate the impacts at these stations. The “hotspot” information was released eight months ahead of the Games to ensure that businesses and individuals have time to prepare.
Two thirds of London’s Tube and DLR stations will see no impact, in terms of additional time taken to board a train. However, on the busiest days, there will an additional three million journeys in London as people watch the Games and attend cultural events, meaning the road and public transport networks will be much busier than usual in certain locations.
Regarding conclusions in the recent National Audit Office Report, two key challenges that took longer than anticipated to achieve were: — Transport planning for new locations such as training facilities. — Communicating the transport impact at all competition venues.
In the last few weeks very comprehensive information on these issues has been released by LOCOG and TfL to the public and businesses respectively. Weekly progress review meetings are being held to ensure that these elements of Games transport planning remain on track.
Overall, we remain confident that transport planning for the Games continues to make strong progress, with key milestones delivered such as £6.5 billion of wider transport infrastructure delivered on time, the launch of the final overall transport plan earlier this year, and transport tickets for all modes were bookable a year before the Games. John Armitt Chairman 22 December 2011 cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Ev 74 Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence
Written evidence submitted by the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) Please accept my apologies for the delay in responding to your letter dated 7 December.
LOCOG’s Budget As you may have seen from Jonathan Stephens, Permanent Secretary at DCMS, and Paul Deighton’s oral evidence to the Public Accounts Committee, we fully intend to help Government remain within the committed £9.3 billion public sector funding package. Whilst we recognise that our budget is finely balanced, this has always been the case and our intention has always been, and continues to be, to deliver within the financial resources available to us. Over the past year we have significantly reduced the risk to the public purse by meeting our sponsorship revenue targets and by raising a significant proportion of our ticketing income. Since being awarded the Games in 2005, we have operated a strict process of project and financial management, scoping and procurement to maintain within our core bid budget of circa £2 billion. Translating a winning bid to an operationally deliverable Games is a naturally dynamic process and we have had to respond to many changes outside our control, despite this we have kept our costs within our bid budget. That we have stayed within budget is testimony to the strict internal processes we have put in place internally with our senior management, with the LOCOG Board Audit Committee and with GOE to manage our costs, raise revenue and mitigate risk. We have maintained within budget by determining scope, refining plans, maintaining a tight control on headcount, enforcing rigorous change management procedures and driving costs/ value for money from our procurement processes. We have significantly mitigated the risk to the public purse by meeting our revenue raising target of over £700 million in local sponsorship income (a target set in very different economic times), ticket sales are strong and we are on target to raise the remaining £200 million in our budget. We will continue to be focussed on maximising revenues, minimising costs and mitigating risk. Our Anticipated Final Cost (“AFC”) process tracks all risks against our budget lines. These are continually reviewed by senior management, including a weekly formal AFC meeting between the CEO, CFO and Director of Games Operations. The results of these reviews are shared weekly with the Audit Committee of the LOCOG Board and biweekly with the Government Olympic Executive. We will continue this rigorous process of managing our budget and contingency up to and throughout the Games. Alongside this—and as set out in the latest Quarterly Economic Report published by GOE in December— within the project as a whole there remains £528 million of unallocated contingency within the Public Sector Funding Package managed by DCMS, £354 million held against programme wide contingency and £174 million held by the ODA. On a prudent estimate of potential risks, together with an allowance for unknown risks, DCMS regard this as adequate, with £36 million headroom.
Security You asked for further information in relation to Venue Security. I thought you would be interested to see the attached letter from DCMS and the Home Office which sets out a summary of the background to the changes in venue security announced before Christmas, and includes the numbers you requested at points 3 and 4 in your letter. On the matter of foreign security personnel that will accompany each national team, this is a matter for the Home Office under existing arrangements for foreign security personnel to operate within the UK and I have asked the Home Office to come back to you on this specific point. I hope that this answers your questions and I am happy to come in and brief you in further detail on any other issues that you might want to raise with either myself or Paul Deighton. Sebastian Coe KBE Chairman 17 January 2012
Annex Letter from the DCMS and Home Office to the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, House of Commons MANAGING PREPARATIONS FOR THE OLYMPICS When we appeared before the Committee on 14 December, we undertook to write to you providing further information on a number of issues that arose. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence Ev 75
Contingency and Costs Can we first re-iterate two points we made at the beginning of the hearing. First, there remains £528 million of unallocated contingency within the PFSP of which £174 million is currently available to the ODA and £354 million is held as programme-wide contingency. The NAO confirmed in the hearing that they agreed with these figures. Our prudent estimate of potential risks, together with allowance for unknown risks, shows that this is adequate, with £36 million headroom. This means that, either some 25% of the full original contingency of £2.2 billion, or 35% of the original £1 billion programme-wide contingency, remains available with just eight months to go. With more than £0.5 billion of uncommitted contingency, there is good reason for confidence that the PFSP will be adequate, although we agree there are always residual risks and so we are determined to maintain rigorous control of costs. It is not consistent with these agreed facts to claim that only £36 million of the PFSP remains uncommitted, or unallocated, or available—that seriously misrepresents the position, and risks undermining the PAC’s consistent support for good risk management practises, as demonstrated in the establishment and management of the contingency, over the last four years. Second, we should like to re-iterate that the costs identified in paragraph 5.5 of the NAO Report have always been identified as outside the PFSP—they were for example, described as such in the 2007 NAO report and in the January 2008 GOE Annual Report—and that we have always been transparent about the costs covered by the PFSP. It has never included costs, such as the land costs, which are likely to be recovered, or costs which are part of the normal activity of government, such as the administration costs of departments. Adding these on to the PFSP and then presenting them as meaning the costs of the Olympics are higher would misrepresent the position, takes no account of the transparency that has been applied and again risks undermining the efforts made to control and contain costs within the PFSP and assure the public and Parliament that costs will not be allowed to increase above the budget set in March 2007.
Venue Security The Committee was interested in the increased requirement for private security guards and the consequential increase in the cost of venue security. The original level of guarding resource of up to 10,000 venue guards was based on the best information available at the time, namely from the Manchester 2002 Commonwealth Games with some Olympic information from the Turin Winter Olympic Games. However, the absence of comparable Games (one taking place in the heart of an urban area in a major Western capital city in a high threat environment) meant we had no suitable precedent on which to base planning. The detailed planning work for venue security took place this year—this timing was dictated by a significant number of other operational arrangements which needed to be finalised first, including the detailed competition schedule of over 1,000 events; confirmation of over 100 venues which needed some level of security; and venue operating plans for each venue including, importantly, the times of operation in the lead up to the games, during the Games, over the transition period between the two Games and in the winding up of each venue at the end of the Games period. Most of these details could not have been known before now but all of them have contributed to the requirement for security personnel. Importantly, it is also unlikely that costs would have been any less, even if detailed planning had been possible earlier. The inevitable uncertainty behind operational planning was one of the factors leading to the establishment of high levels of contingency in the programme as a whole. The Committee asked for further clarification of the costs. The new venue security budget is £582 million, of which £553 million comes from the overall Olympic Public Sector Funding Package, as reported in the NAO’s report, and £29 million from LOCOG’s own resources. The costs for the military contribution to venue security are fully included in this figure, have been agreed with the Ministry of Defence and are designed to ensure that all of the additional costs falling to that Department are met. Defence Ministers are satisfied that the level of military involvement—details of which were contained in the Written Ministerial Statement made on 15 December—is compatible with existing and anticipated military commitments. Of course, the costs of wider military deployments (outside of the contribution to venue security) fall to the MoD as part of their on-going defence commitments.
Workforce Mix As we explained at the hearing the 23,700 workforce will be made up of a mix of volunteers, military and security guards, who will in the main be recruited through G4S. We expected that there will be around 3,300, who will not be paid (ie volunteers). The roles they will perform will be managing queues and getting spectators ready for search and screening. They will not, however, perform roles such as managing screening equipment for which a higher level of training will be required. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Ev 76 Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence
The MOD Written Ministerial Statement set out that there would be 3,500 troops employed on venue security which will rise to 7,500 for the 17 days of the Olympic Games. These troops will be paid in accordance with their normal arrangements.
G4S
The Committee were also interested in the G4S contract, which was signed through a Deed of Variation on 15 December and includes costings in relation to; labour, programme management, operational expenditure and insurance premiums.
With regards labour costs, budgeted hourly pay rates have been jointly developed between LOCOG and G4S following extensive market research and discussion. Pay starts at approximately £10 per hour, to which have to be added associated costs such as NI and holiday pay, with supervisory or specialist staff being paid at a higher rate. Ultimately, the market will determine the pay rate and whilst current budgeted rates are above the London Living Wage, pay rates are identified as a risk against the contingency. G4S are however incentivised to identify savings opportunities in labour costs.
Programme management covers all activities required to establish, plan and operate the services to be provided. This includes the programme management structure, the Project Management Office, recruitment, screening and vetting, IT infrastructure, games time operational support (accreditation, scheduling, payroll etc.), office accommodation and a multi-use training facility. Within the Project Management Office the average headcount of FTEs from November 2011 to September 2012 is 627. The organisation peaks at 904 FTEs in July 2012.
Operational expenditure encompasses allowances for training of security personnel, uniforms, travel, accommodation and catering. These are all budgetary allowances for pass through costs and will only be incurred with the agreement of LOCOG.
This contract has been structured to create incentives for G4S to maximise delivery and minimise costs. The level of profit that G4S can expect to make from the contract is comparable to that in other major Government security contracts.
The Government is satisfied that the G4S contract represents good value for money, and this was confirmed by the Home Office’s Major Projects Commercial Director and through the engagement of the Crown Commercial Representative for G4S.
We should also firmly dispel any suggestion that LOCOG as a private company is making any profit from these arrangements.
G4S Local Employment
The Committee was interested in the steps that are being taken to ensure that the venue security roles are secured by people in the Olympic Boroughs. Paul Deighton, CEO of LOCOG chairs a 6 Host Borough Employment and Skills Board to which representatives of the 6 Host Boroughs of Barking & Dagenham, Greenwich, Hackney, Newham, Tower Hamlets and Waltham Forest are invited to attend. G4S sits on this board. The purpose of this Board is to maximise the employment opportunities available for 6 Host Borough residents from LOCOG and its contractors. Since contracting G4S LOCOG has worked with them to establish specific recruitment events with each Host Borough, its local job brokerage scheme including Job Centre Plus. LOCOG has worked with G4S to build relationships across each Host Borough to support this work. G4S now runs daily recruitment sessions each week at West Ham Football Club to which all Boroughs job brokerage schemes channel their suitable candidates. At the end of November 2011 982 Host Borough candidates sourced via job brokerages and JCP had been offered Games time positions with G4S subject to accepting these roles, vetting and passing training.
JCP and the host Boroughs are also proactively targeting those people registered as seeking security work and providing a range of pre-employment training designed to equip people for and support them through the Security Industry Authority (SIA) accreditation process. In addition to the LOCOG Bridging the Gap project, JCP are working with Association of London Colleges to fill security training opportunities with unemployed young people.
We hope this covers the key outstanding points raised at the hearing—do let us know if you would like more information. Jonathan Stephens Dame Helen Ghosh cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence Ev 77
Written evidence submitted by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport
Thank you for your letter dated 31 January requesting follow-up information following my appearance in front of your Committee in connection with the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.
The answers to your questions are as follows:
Q393—Please indicate the proportion of the Olympic Park’s energy that will derive from renewable sources
Under the previous administration/Government, an ambition to achieve a 50% reduction in carbon emissions from the built environment of the Olympic Park by 2013 was set and this was to be achieved through a number of initiatives including a target to install and use new on-site renewable energy sources to reduce the call on conventional energy sources by 20% (and not 80% as Hansard reports Mr Saunders as saying).
In June 2010, the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) announced that it was no longer feasible to install a 120-metre wind turbine on the Olympic Park, thereby making an already challenging renewables target even more difficult to achieve. The ODA has identified additional on-Park locations to install more photovoltaic (PV) cells than originally proposed but it is not expected that the overall reduction in call on conventional energy sources will be greater than 10% (against a revised planning condition of 9%).
The ODA made the announcement about further PV cells on 8 April 2011 and, at the same time, announced that it would be investing over £1 million in a new project, based on the Mayor’s RE:NEW energy efficiency scheme, to provide carbon reduction measures to local housing and schools in four of the Olympic Park Host Boroughs, including draught proofing, low energy lighting, insulation and standby switches.
This energy efficiency retro-fitting project, and all the other carbon reduction measures employed by the ODA including the use of PV cells; low carbon venue design; reuse of materials; use of concrete with high percentage of recycled aggregates; and transporting materials by rail or water rather than by road, mean that we are on target to reduce carbon emissions due to the built environment by 59%, by 2013.
In addition to the ODA’s measures, the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) plans to employ stringent energy conservation measures to achieve carbon savings equivalent to its original target of 20% of Games-time energy for the Olympic Park to be supplied by new on-site renewables, such as reducing non-essential air conditioning, and monitoring energy use in venues.
Q 408 and 411—Please confirm what access emergency vehicles will have to the Olympic Route Network: will they be able to use the venue lanes at any time, or only during an emergency?
Please provide some information on the steps that have been taken to ensure the safety of pedestrians across the Olympic Route Network
Emergency vehicles will only be able to use the temporary Games Lanes on the Olympic Route Network (ORN) if they are responding to an emergency.
In common with all other road users, emergency vehicles that are not on emergency callouts will be able to use two-thirds of the ORN. In London, the ORN covers just 1% of London’s road network—and only one third of that will have Games Lanes on it (and only where another lane remains for normal traffic).
It is essential that athletes, officials, media and others working at the Games (the Games Family) can be moved safely, quickly and reliably between the competition venues, accommodation and other key locations. It is imperative, therefore, that the temporary Games Lanes, which will operate on the busiest sections of the ORN at certain times be reserved for Games Family vehicles and blue-light emergency vehicles on call.
Safety of all road users is of paramount importance to TfL. TfL are undertaking extensive road safety audits on the ORN which will include assessment of pedestrian safety where ORN measures are in place. During the detailed design of the ORN, TfL reduced the number of closed pedestrian facilities after detailed analysis demonstrated that the journey time savings at these crossings would be negligible or minimal.
TfL will also be implementing a controlled “Central London Zone” which will implement temporary changes to enhance pedestrian safety such as closing traffic lanes to give more space to pedestrians; wider crossings; and restricting volume of traffic on certain roads.
I would also like to take this opportunity to further clarify a point I made during the session regarding the extra money provided towards the cost of the ceremonies for the Olympic and Paralympic Games. The additional Government contribution of £41 million is made up of £34 million already allocated and a £7 million contingency held by Government and will be used across all of the four major ceremonies, not just the Olympic opening ceremony. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [06-03-2012 08:49] Job: 018632 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/018632/018632_w003_kathy_OLY 04 DCMS.xml
Ev 78 Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence
I would be grateful if you would pass this letter on to the rest of the Committee Members. Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport 13 February 2012
Printed in the United Kingdom by The Stationery Office Limited 03/2012 018632 19585
Distributed by TSO (The Stationery Office) and available from:
Online www.tsoshop.co.uk
Mail, Telephone, Fax & E-mail TSO PO Box 29, Norwich NR3 1GN General enquiries 0870 600 5522 Order through the Parliamentary Hotline Lo-call 0845 7 023474 Fax orders: 0870 600 5533 Email: [email protected] Textphone: 0870 240 3701
The Parliamentary Bookshop 12 Bridge Street, Parliament Square London SW1A 2JX Telephone orders: 020 7219 3890 General enquiries: 020 7219 3890 Fax orders: 020 7219 3866 Email: [email protected] Internet: http://www.bookshop.parliament.uk
TSO@Blackwell and other Accredited Agents © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2012 PEFC/16-33-622 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament Licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/