UK Parliament / Open data

London Olympics Bill

Proceeding contribution from Jacqui Lait (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 21 July 2005. It occurred during Debate on bills on London Olympics Bill.
. I do not represent a Gloucestershire seat, but I think that Gloucestershire can claim to have recreated, at an even earlier date, the original Olympic games on Dover hill, but I take my hon. Friend’s point. We do not want an ODA that is too big, and the operation has to be clearly and tightly managed. Some financial questions are very much at the front of the minds of London council tax payers. Obviously, we want the Olympics to keep to budget, and we recognise that the Treasury has already set aside contingency sums. In the bid document, the Government also accepted responsibility for any cost overrun. That has been divided broadly between the lottery and the Mayor of London. If there is a cost overrun—we all hope that there will not be—we would like to know who is responsible for what percentage share. Council tax payers in London will find it daunting if, according to a current estimate, they are to pay an extra £20 on a band D council tax bill for the next 40 years. We need clarification of whether the 12 per cent. Treasury tax take on the Olympic lottery will be used as a further contingency, or could reduce council tax payers’ contribution of £20 a year to half of that.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
436 c1461 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top