Going for gold

Decision time looms for the government: make a bid for the 2012 Olympics, or not? Arup's report on the costs and benefits of bidding for the event was made public in November. The report outlines a proposal for a London Olympic Games and assesses the implications for key issues such as transport, accommodation and security. The Olympic village, main stadium and many other key facilities would be located in the Lower Lee Valley, East London. The estimated cost for delivering and running the event is £494 million – cash which the report claims will be balanced by the wider benefits of bringing the games to the capital.

Mark Bostock, director of Arup says: "This is an important report. In the event that all stakeholders agree upon a London bid, an effective concordat needs to be put in place between the Mayor, the British Olympic Association, and the government at the beginning to cover all eventualities of bidding for and staging the games. An effective concordat should secure the wider benefits to London. These need to be articulated from the outset."

It is these wider benefits that sports minister Richard Caborn is going to have to be sure of if he is to convince the government that a bid for the Games is feasible. The legacy left to the host city seems to be the biggest deciding factor in the decision over whether to bid. There are the obvious pros such as the cultural, educational and employment benefits the event could bring to the area, as well as the regeneration of one of the more run down and underprivileged parts of London.

The major stumbling block, however, could be what to do with the main stadium after the event. The conclusions of Arup's study highlight the importance of securing 'legacy uses for key Olympic venues', stating that these uses need to be confirmed before a decision is made. Reports suggest the Sydney Olympic complex is now under-used at a cost of £10 million a year and that is something ministers will be well aware of when it comes to considering a bid. Even before the International Olympic Committee vote in 2005 to decide the venue for the 2012 games, plans would have to be made to deal with the impact beyond the event itself. A long-term occupant will need to be found for the stadium before the design stage is reached.

Several suggestions have been mooted in the national press already. Hardly a day has gone by without the Evening Standard carrying a story on either the growing army of supporters for a bid, or a story about who might want to make the Olympic stadium their new home. These include a move by either West Ham United or Tottenham football clubs into the arena, similar to the impending move by Manchester City into the Commonwealth Games stadium. This kind of initiative would seem to be a logical proposition, but there has been no confirmation from anyone involved with any of the parties mentioned that they would definitely be interested in occupying the venue.

The UK has proved that it is capable of successfully staging a major sporting event. The success of the Commonwealth Games is testament to that. But the whole legacy issue is going to be the deciding factor on whether or not London will bid for the Olympics. The event itself may well be a resounding success in terms of organisation and execution, but we don't want to be left after two glorious weeks, with a huge debt, a number of high-tech first class facilities and no one to use them. The large white dome down on the Thames in Greenwich is quite enough of that kind of thing already.