London Olympics bill again under fire

MPs blame London Olympic organisers for spending money ‘like water’ on Aquatics Centre

Written by AccountancyAge.com

The culture, media and sport select committee's latest report into the Olympic Games commends the progress made by LOCOG, the Olympic Delivery Authority and the London Development Agency, but the government's funding and planning of the event has again attracted scathing criticism from MPs.

The report on the games also claims the contingency fund for the Games is almost £1bn more than the Government has admitted, sportslife.com reports.

The Aquatics Centre in particular has been singled out by the MPs for its cost blow out from the £75m put forward at the London bid, to the final £242m announced earlier this month.

‘It appears to be over-designed... and an expensive way of providing the facilities for water sports needed during and after the Games,' the report notes. ‘The history of the Aquatics Centre shows a risible approach to cost control and that the Games organisers seem to be willing to spend money like water.’

Further reading:

Deloitte appointed official Olympics firm

Read the sportinglife.com story

Enjoyed this article? Help spread the word:

Comments

Reader comments for this story

White papers

Related jobs

Spotlight

Richard Solomons, FD of Intercontinental Hotel Group

Profile: Richard Solomons, FD of InterContinental Hotel Group

Richard Solomons is masterminding Intercontinental Hotel Group's strategy of ownership,...

PwC 10-year anniversary special report

Relive how the controversial mega-merger of Price Waterhouse and Coopers...

Make partner fast with YP

The latest edition of Young Professional features our definitive guide...

Find your next job

Find your next job
Salary Checker

Newsletters

Sign up here for the very latest news delivered to your inbox. Choose from the following options:

Search white papers

Search white papers

Have your say

Fair value accounting has attracted a lot of criticism, but is it actually fair?
Yes, it's better than any other method available.
No, it's caused too much trouble. Get rid.
It's promising but could work better with modifications.

Job of the week

More finance jobs...

Your next job