Some local comp?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(That's without getting into other tax funding)

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



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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



Why?

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



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



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

Could you get your brain cell around that, dear.

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

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

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