The London 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games : post-Games review
Author(s)
Bibliographic Information
The London 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games : post-Games review
(HC, 812)
The Stationery Office, 2013
Available at 1 libraries
  Aomori
  Iwate
  Miyagi
  Akita
  Yamagata
  Fukushima
  Ibaraki
  Tochigi
  Gunma
  Saitama
  Chiba
  Tokyo
  Kanagawa
  Niigata
  Toyama
  Ishikawa
  Fukui
  Yamanashi
  Nagano
  Gifu
  Shizuoka
  Aichi
  Mie
  Shiga
  Kyoto
  Osaka
  Hyogo
  Nara
  Wakayama
  Tottori
  Shimane
  Okayama
  Hiroshima
  Yamaguchi
  Tokushima
  Kagawa
  Ehime
  Kochi
  Fukuoka
  Saga
  Nagasaki
  Kumamoto
  Oita
  Miyazaki
  Kagoshima
  Okinawa
  Korea
  China
  Thailand
  United Kingdom
  Germany
  Switzerland
  France
  Belgium
  Netherlands
  Sweden
  Norway
  United States of America
Note
"Fortieth report of session 2012-13 : report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence"
"Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 18 March 2013"
At head of title: House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts
Description and Table of Contents
Description
The success of the London 2012 Games demonstrates that it is possible for government departments to work together and with other bodies effectively to deliver complex programmes. The GBP9.298 billion Public Sector Funding Package for the Games is set to be underspent. The Department is also committed to reflect on what more it can do to present costs in a way that goes further and brings out those costs associated with the Games and the legacy that are not covered by the Funding Package. The notable blemish on planning for the Games was venue security. Also, during the Games a large number of accredited seats went unused at events for which the public demand for tickets could not be met. International sports bodies and media organisations wield a lot of power but demands should be challenged. It is now up to the London Legacy Development Corporation to attract investment in the Olympic Park and generate the promised returns to funders. There is concern that the lottery good causes do not have any clear influence over decisions about future sales, despite these decisions directly affecting how much will be available to them and when.
On the wider legacy, we look to the Cabinet Office to provide strong leadership to ensure delivery of the longer term benefits. The Government also needs to do all it can to learn and disseminate lessons and to encourage volunteering opportunities both within sport and beyond
by "Nielsen BookData"