Adrian wrote:
) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying
:

I notice that Ken Livingstone, who is so anti air travel, is in
Singapore at the moment. No chance that he could have done his bit by
video link then.

Ah, but that's different, because he's "one of them" not "one of us". He's
Important, so the same rules don't apply.
Yes amazing, our journies aren't important but give a politician a
chance to go on a jolly and they can never say "well actually this
journey is a waste of resources and contributes unnecesarrily to co2
immisssions".
This from the guy who doesn't flush his toilet after a ****. I'd hate
to have the job of cleaning his wc pan.

Kevin

On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 18:50:19 +0200, "Skokkie"
wrote:

Cancelled due to a lack of interest



Utter ******** mate. It's all going ahead. There's hardly anyone
against this bid, we're all up for it, apart from a few smelly
salmon-smokers in E15.

On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 20:31:43 +0100, Paul Terry
wrote:

In message , congokid
writes

I was in Trafalgar Square this afternoon. They're building a stage or
something for the event.

It'll be a bit of a damp squib should the decision go to Paris.

I very much hope that it will - they are much better able to fund the
likely multi-billion pound debt (I see that Toronto are still paying off
the interest nearly 30 years later,

Do you mean Montreal? That was the last Games to lose money. A lot of
things have changed since then.

while Greece is saddled with a chain of unused facilities that nobody
wants

Hence the "no white elephants" policy. There's a reason why the bid
team has been banging on about the legacy aspect.



We'll know soon enough...

--
James Farrar

September's coming soon

In article ,
Tristán White wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 18:50:19 +0200, "Skokkie"
wrote:

Cancelled due to a lack of interest



Utter ******** mate. It's all going ahead. There's hardly anyone
against this bid, we're all up for it, apart from a few smelly
salmon-smokers in E15.

What *did* you do at Glastonbury, Tris ??

Nick
--
http://www.leverton.org/ ... So express yourself

In message , James Farrar
writes

Do you mean Montreal?

Yes I did, sorry!

That was the last Games to lose money.

Eh? Even Sydney ended up with "a debt that will take a decade to pay off
and unused facilities that require millions of dollars in public
subsidies every year".

The Athens Olympics were initially estimated to cost $1.3 billion. When
the detailed planning was finished, the cost to $5.3 billion. After the
games were over, Greece found it had actually spent some $14.2 billion
and had seriously damaged its economy in the process.

while Greece is saddled with a chain of unused facilities that nobody
wants

Hence the "no white elephants" policy.

That's what they said about the dome

We'll know soon enough...

Yes, I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
--
Paul Terry

In message , David Bennetts
writes
I think London will have some problems in coping, particularly with
transport.
I genuinely don't believe that to be the case. (Although I suspect
that *any* of the cities up for it *could* stage the games.)

--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 12:52:43 +0100, Paul Terry
wrote:

In message , James Farrar
writes


Hence the "no white elephants" policy.

That's what they said about the dome

Irrelevant comparison. The Dome had two possible purposes, between
which the government compromised, leading to something pointless. The
purpose of sporting facilities is self-defined.

--
James Farrar

September's coming soon

In message , James Farrar
writes

The Dome had two possible purposes, between which the government
compromised, leading to something pointless. The purpose of sporting
facilities is self-defined.

As in "Pickett's Lock" ?

Anyway, I see London have won the bid - I'm sure it'll all be fun in
2012, but I am sure the cost (especially to Londoners) will be enormous
and, unlike Pickett's Lock, we won't have the option of pulling-out when
it all becomes too expensive.

--
Paul Terry

"Stuart" wrote in message
. uk...
wrote:


I notice that Ken Livingstone, who is so anti air travel, is in
Singapore at the moment. No chance that he could have done his bit by
video link then.

What a video screen on wheels moving robotically around the Raffles
conference centre talking to people?

Surely he's only anti cheap or un-necessary air travel

Yes, encouraging air travel to the UK for the Olympics

In message , James Farrar
writes

The Dome had two possible purposes, between which the government
compromised, leading to something pointless. The purpose of sporting
facilities is self-defined.

The purpose of sporting facilities is defined primarily in terms of
value for money, and that includes demand and longevity. The 28 days of
the Olympics is a mere (if brilliant) flash in the pan.

I certainly agree that the London bid has given more thought to long
term use than those Olympics that have resulted in concrete
monstrosities that saw little or no use after the games ended.

However, is the public demand to see cyclists going round in circles so
overwhelming that we really need a permanent velodrome in the Lea Valley
that will accommodate thousands of spectators? Will venues such as Horse
Guard's Parade or Hyde Park really be re-dedicated to improving the
sporting prowess of our young? If the Dome is so good for indoor sport,
why is it not already being used for that purpose? Whatever happened to
our "National Sports Centre" at Crystal Palace?

As a former teacher (one who taught sport in earlier days) I would
rather see the money being used to restore all of the swimming pools,
ice rinks and school sports facilities that have been lost or sold off
in London over the last 30 years, than being expended on a publicity
stunt that will be as short-lived as a glorious firework display.

--
Paul Terry