Thursday, May 31, 2007

The cheek by Jowell

Tessa Jowell has responded to an e-petition about money being siphoned off from voluntary organisations to fund the Olympics.
Jowell reiterates that, “The amount going to the VCS (voluntary and community sector) will therefore continue at the levels planned. Given your concerns, we hope that you will welcome this approach.”

But……don't get too excited, ”The remaining £250 million will come from the other Lottery distributors, with the exception of UK Sport, between 2009 and 2012. The other distributors have said that this need not impact on any existing commitments. The impact on future commitments will be assessed in due course..”

In other words areas such as arts and heritage will be hit for cash. It may not have an impact in the short-term but on future commitments. It seems to me there will be inevitable cuts.

Central government will be contributing a staggering £6billion to this 2-week jamboree. This London based elitist event will inevitably deny the majority to participate.
Jowell again argues, “We hope that you consider that this represents a fair approach to funding such an important national event” …

Hmmmm. Fair? An important national event? Who is she trying to kid? Jowell would prefer to see countless voluntary orgs fall by the wayside due to a slashed budget and no matter how much she promises that cash won’t be diverted it won’t be the case. They continuously have to raid various public purses to bale themselves out of the mire.

Btw: There is a debate in Parliament planned for the 6th June to discuss the impact on arts and heritage of the diversion of lottery funding to the 2012 London Olympic Games.

8 comments:

AN said...

Well quite apart from the elitism, etc etc.

My country, England, hasn't even got a team in the event!

And I note that Scotland is also being asked to contribute financially.

How ludicrous.

neprimerimye said...

Would it not be a good thing to end all state subsidies to the so called Voluntary and Community Sector'? After all these concerns tend to be populated by do gooding social worker scum. Sacking the lot and summary execution for every tenth one cannot come too soon for my taste.

Commissar said...

If only to play devil's advocate, there will be some good to come from the games.

It is one of the great internationalist events being held on our doorstep, the regeneration of certain parts of London will be welcome and the invest in sport will help many underprivaledged kids.

It is an aweful shame that olympic funds have to be diverted from elsewhere, often at the detrement of other causes, but atleast its not all to line the pockets of Richard Branson and his ilk

AN said...

Commissar

Does the already overheated London economy require further state subsidy more than the Rhonda or Deeside, or whereever.

And please bear in mind, as I have detailed in earlier posts about the Olympics, that funds are being diverted to UK Sport (which finances elite profesisonals is medal hopeful sports like archery) which are being taken from groundlevel sports. Kindly explain how that helps underrprivalaged kids - their school playing field has been sold off, sports council subsidies have been cut, but they can watch the UK toe-clipping team win a bronze medal on TV. :o)

Louisefeminista said...

Commissar: Not that I am plugging the mag shamelessly but I would encourage you to read this month's Labour Left Briefing as there's a very good piece written by Kevin Blowe on the "human cost" to the Olympics.

neprimerimye said...

Let's be honest most lefties dislike the Olympics cos (a) they are lazy bastards and (b) dislike the principle of competition. At least those are my reasons for disliking a very boring group of pastimes designed for those too stupid to read.

AN said...

Actually Louise this month LLB is quite good.

And i meant to say "Cheek by Jowell"!

Your talents are obvioulsy wasted, that is almost worthy of Kelvin McKensie himself.

Louisefeminista said...

AN: Is that a compliment?

The tabloid life is for me then.